Europe
Europe takes action against Israel amid escalating Gaza crisis
European countries have decided to take action against Israel, which has resolved to continue its occupation and blockade of Gaza.
In Gaza, renewed bombardments on March 18 resulted in at least 3,300 deaths. Since October 7, 2023, the total number of fatalities in the Gaza Strip is estimated to be approximately 53,500, with over 28,000 women and girls among them, according to UN data.
The Israeli government has announced it will further intensify its attacks. The obstruction of public access to aid supplies also effectively continues. Although Israel officially stated it would permit aid convoys, on Monday, it limited the number of convoys to five.
According to UN data, 500 convoys reached the Gaza Strip daily before the war began.
On Tuesday, UN emergency relief coordinator Tom Fletcher warned that up to 14,000 babies and young children could die within 48 hours if aid shipments were not increased. Following this warning, Israel announced on Tuesday that it could increase the number of permitted shipments to 100.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Washington had warned that “support for Israel would not be possible” if “images of mass starvation” were leaked to the public. Netanyahu remarked, “Therefore, we must somehow solve the problem.”
Steps toward recognizing the State of Palestine may accelerate
Over the past year, several EU member states have begun to see initial results in response to Israel’s occupation of the Gaza Strip and the war crimes committed there. Thus, on May 28, 2024, Ireland, Spain, and non-EU member Norway officially recognized Palestine as a state; on June 4, 2024, Slovenia followed suit.
Previously, eight EU countries had taken this step: Poland, Czechia, and Slovakia (then united as Czechoslovakia) in 1988, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria, and Cyprus. Sweden joined them in 2014. Malta recognized the right of Palestinians to a state in 1988 but did not recognize the state itself.
In Greece, the parliament requested the government to recognize Palestine as a state at the end of 2015, but the government did not fulfill this request.
In April, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that he would declare a decision on recognition at a conference in New York in early June but stipulated that several Arab states must recognize Israel in return.
In total, 147 UN member states and the Vatican recognize the State of Palestine. Germany is not among these countries and has not reversed its stance on the matter.
Europe’s previous anti-Israel decisions
European countries had previously decided to review military and political cooperation with Israel, but in practice, these decisions were largely ineffective.
For example, a court in the Netherlands prohibited the delivery of US F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel in February 2024. Outside the EU, the United Kingdom imposed some restrictions on arms shipments to Israel in September 2024, although export licenses increased in the subsequent three months.
Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp stated on May 7 that his government had called on the EU to “review the Association Agreement with Israel” because the Israeli government was no longer fulfilling its obligation to “protect fundamental human rights in external relations” as stipulated in Article 2 of the agreement.
On Monday, France and the United Kingdom, along with Canada, issued a joint statement to increase pressure, openly criticizing Israel’s war policy and announcing “additional measures, including targeted sanctions.”
London also suspended ongoing free trade negotiations with Israel yesterday (May 20).
London leads international condemnation of Israel
UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy stated on Tuesday that the UK decided to freeze new trade agreement talks with Israel in response to the “appalling” situation caused by the attacks in Gaza.
International criticism escalated on Tuesday, with London summoning the Israeli ambassador over the escalating tensions in Gaza, and Prime Minister Keir Starmer demanding Israel “massively increase” aid to the region.
Starmer stated in the British parliament, “The renewed bombardment of innocent children is absolutely unacceptable. Israel’s announcement that it will allow ‘basic’ quantities of food into Gaza—I say basic quantities—is completely and utterly insufficient.”
Lammy also accused the Netanyahu government of “planning to drive Gazans from their homes into a southern corner and provide them with only a fraction of the aid they need.”
The Minister also sharply criticized Bezalel Smotrich, Israel’s ultranationalist finance minister, who said that Israel was “cleansing” Gaza and “destroying everything that remains” in the region.
Lammy stated, “We must name this: This extremism is dangerous, abhorrent, monstrous, and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.”
Britain also imposed sanctions on three Israeli settlers, two illegal settler outposts, and two organizations supporting violence against Palestinian communities in the region.
Some in Europe also support Israel and Netanyahu
On the other hand, not all European countries are willing to take action against Israel’s occupation of Gaza.
Berlin, for example, is refraining from all measures against Israel. Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz reiterated last week that Prime Minister Netanyahu, for whom an arrest warrant has been issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, “should in principle be able to travel to Germany.”
Merz stated that “information would be provided in a timely manner” to the public on “how this would be possible, if planned.”
Hungary, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, was the only country to accept Netanyahu despite the arrest warrant. During the visit, Orbán announced that his country would withdraw from the ICC.
The Hungarian parliament officially approved this step yesterday, Tuesday.
Europe divided on relations with Israel
At the EU foreign ministers’ meeting held yesterday, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul opposed reviewing the association agreement signed by the EU with Israel, at the request of the Netherlands, but could not get his view accepted.
Nine member states—Belgium, Finland, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden—publicly announced their support for the Dutch proposal before Tuesday’s foreign ministers’ meeting.
According to diplomatic sources who spoke to Euronews, Denmark, Estonia, Malta, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia also supported the review conducted on Tuesday. Austria, a loyal supporter of Israel, did not raise any objections.
According to sources, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, and Lithuania opposed it, while Latvia remained “neutral.”
A proposal to increase pressure on Israel by imposing new sanctions on Israeli settlers responsible for violence in the West Bank was supported by 26 out of 27 member states but vetoed by Hungary.
According to EU diplomacy chief Kaja Kallas, the EU Commission will now begin examining whether Israel is complying with its human rights obligations, particularly under the agreement. Otherwise, the agreement will be suspended, which would at least make trade between the two parties more expensive.
However, the review could take a very long time. Furthermore, it is uncertain whether EU member states will approve the suspension of the agreement.
Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard went further, stating that she would “push for EU sanctions to be imposed against individual Israeli ministers.”
On the other hand, an EU diplomat who spoke to the Financial Times stated that regardless of the outcome of the bloc’s review of the trade agreement with Israel, “The fact that the vast majority of member states have demanded this sends a strong message to the Israeli government.”
Israel’s reaction to Britain and the EU
Israel responded to Kaja Kallas’s statement late on Tuesday.
Oren Marmorstein, spokesperson for the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, issued a statement on the social media platform X, announcing that they rejected the justification for the EU’s decision to review its relations with Israel.
Marmorstein argued that Israel was in a defensive position in a war “imposed by Hamas.”
The spokesperson also reminded the EU that the Israeli government had accepted numerous US ceasefire and hostage exchange proposals that Hamas had rejected.
Marmorstein stated, “Ignoring these facts and criticizing Israel stiffens Hamas’s stance and encourages Hamas to take up arms. Hamas’s recent praise for such criticisms is a clear indication of this and prolongs the war.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson criticized the EU for ignoring the recent steps taken by the US and Israel to ensure aid flow in the region, while praising other countries that “accepted this fact” and continued to support Israel.
Marmorstein also stated that Israel is open to discussions with EU representatives and member states to resolve the issue, concluding his statement by calling on Brussels to pressure “Hamas, which is the source of the real problem.”
Marmorstein also sharply criticized Britain, stating, “If the British government risks harming the British economy due to its anti-Israel obsessions and internal political calculations, that is its right. External pressure will not deter Israel from defending its existence and security against its enemies who seek to destroy it. The British Mandate ended exactly 77 years ago. External pressure will not deter Israel from its struggle to defend its existence and security against its enemies who seek to destroy it.”
Europe
China’s critical mineral restrictions challenge EU defence expansion plans
The European Union’s plans to expand its defence capabilities are being hindered by China’s export controls and sales restrictions on critical raw materials.
In response, EU leaders are urging member states to accelerate efforts to diversify supply chains.
According to Nikkei Asia, the European Commission announced last week that it would propose new legislation requiring companies across the bloc to broaden their supplier base in an effort to address economic imbalances, although it did not explicitly name China.
The war in Ukraine and growing uncertainty over Washington’s security guarantees have pushed European governments to increase military spending and defence production.
At the same time, according to a report published in May by Joris Teer, a policy analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), China accounts for at least 70% of global mining or refining activity in 17 of the 34 materials classified as critical by the EU. Eight of those 34 materials are currently subject to Chinese export controls.
“China is undermining Europe’s rearmament efforts,” Teer wrote. “Simply by activating this tool, China has already increased its leverage and demonstrated both the capability and willingness to restrict supply whenever it chooses.”
The Aerospace, Security and Defence Industries Association of Europe also warned that geopolitical developments and intensifying global competition for critical raw materials are further underscoring the need to strengthen European supply chains.
The organisation represents more than 4,000 companies, including Britain’s BAE Systems, France’s Thales and Germany’s Rheinmetall.
European defence manufacturers are pursuing a range of strategies, including vertical integration, recycling, diversification and stockpiling.
Rheinmetall told Nikkei Asia that it has “no dependencies” and is “well prepared” regarding critical minerals.
A company spokesperson said: “Rheinmetall has stockpiled key raw materials sufficient for several years. We have also implemented IT systems that allow us to centrally monitor and precisely manage raw material consumption across the entire group.”
Analysts, however, caution that stockpiling alone will not be sufficient. Maria Shagina, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said: “Stockpiling serves as an important buffer against sudden disruptions, but on its own it is unlikely to mitigate structural damage over the long term.”
Shagina added that replacing the volume and diversity of critical minerals controlled by Beijing with alternative sources would take years.
In 2024, the EU enacted the European Critical Raw Materials Act, aimed at rebuilding domestic supply chains for such minerals.
The legislation sets 2030 targets for domestic extraction, processing and recycling while limiting dependence on any single third-country supplier to 65%.
A €3 billion ($3.5 billion) fund was established last year to accelerate strategic projects.
Nevertheless, the European Court of Auditors has noted that the 2030 targets are not legally binding and that the EU remains far from achieving them.
Industry groups argue that policy inconsistencies could further slow progress.
The Cobalt Institute, which represents a sector vital to jet engines, advanced batteries and defence alloys, warned that proposed EU chemicals regulations risk undermining the industry.
“Europe has one foot in and one foot out,” said Michael Blakeney, head of government and public affairs at the London-based institute. “It says the right things, but its actions are inconsistent.”
Europe’s efforts are unfolding alongside a more aggressive US strategy to secure critical mineral supply chains.
Shagina said:
“The US is investing more capital to secure and expand capacity, taking greater financial risks and, in some cases, acquiring equity stakes. Europe, by contrast, is generally more cautious, which places it at a relative disadvantage in the competition for critical minerals.”
In April, the EU signed an agreement with the United States to coordinate supplies of critical minerals. Although some member states initially resisted over concerns that the deal could weaken the bloc’s strategic autonomy, they authorised the Commission in early June to join the US-led “Pax Silica” initiative, which coordinates investment and export-control policies.
Teer urged Europe to use ongoing US-EU-Japan negotiations as the nucleus of a broader coalition aimed at making critical mineral production outside China financially viable through state support, minimum-price mechanisms and supply rules.
“Particularly important are countries that either produce raw materials or possess significant mineral deposits, such as Malaysia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Brazil and Indonesia, as well as countries like India with large pools of skilled labour,” he said.
Teer also argued that the EU should activate its Anti-Coercion Instrument, which allows the bloc to impose tariffs and restrictions in response to economic pressure on countries outside the union, in order to deter China from introducing further restrictions.
A European Commission spokesperson said the bloc had “long been aware of the risks associated with the EU’s dependence on critical raw materials.”
“The objective is clear: to anticipate disruptions early and reduce the EU’s vulnerabilities while strengthening our industrial and defence capacities,” the spokesperson said.
Europe
Four European countries move to make citizenship harder to obtain
European countries are increasingly tightening their citizenship rules. Most recently, the Norwegian government has drafted legislation that would raise the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from three years to seven.
The proposed amendments to the citizenship law were presented by the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion.
Under the draft legislation, stateless individuals born in Norway, as well as those who arrived in the country as children, would be required to reside in Norway for at least five years before becoming eligible for citizenship.
The government also plans to increase residency requirements for foreign nationals who are married to or cohabiting with Norwegian citizens.
Language requirements are set to become more demanding as well. The proposal would raise the required level of spoken Norwegian proficiency from A2 to B1. The new rules would apply to applicants aged between 18 and 67.
Commenting on the changes, Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion Kjersti Stenseng said: “Obtaining and holding Norwegian citizenship should be a privilege.”
The government argues that simplifying administrative procedures while simultaneously tightening eligibility criteria will help reduce the country’s large backlog of pending applications and shorten processing times.
Norway is the latest European country to announce revisions to its citizenship rules.
In Finland, the minimum residency requirement for citizenship was increased from five years to eight years on October 1, 2024.
The country also plans to introduce a mandatory citizenship test for applicants aged between 18 and 64 from the beginning of 2027.
Finnish Interior Minister Mari Rantanen said: “The introduction of a citizenship test is the final component of a comprehensive reform aimed at making citizenship requirements more stringent.”
Sweden has also approved a similar reform. Beginning in June 2026, the standard residency requirement for citizenship will increase from five years to eight years. Authorities are also introducing a financial self-sufficiency requirement for applicants and expanding the scope of security screenings.
Explaining the rationale behind the changes, Migration Minister Johan Forssell said: “It was possible to become a citizen after living in the country for five years without knowing a single word of Swedish, learning anything about Swedish society, or even having one’s own source of income.”
The most far-reaching changes have been implemented in Portugal. Portuguese President Antonio Jose Seguro has signed legislation raising the minimum residency requirement for citizenship from five years to 10 years.
For citizens of the European Union and the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, the requirement has been set at seven years.
The residency period will now be calculated from the date a residence permit is granted rather than from the date a citizenship application is submitted. The new rules will also affect the children of immigrants.
Previously, children could obtain citizenship one year after birth if their parents held residence permits. Under the new rules, at least one parent must have legally resided in the country for a minimum of five years.
The law also introduces a mandatory examination covering Portuguese history, culture, values and social structures.
Migration policies are tightening across the European Union as well. On June 17, the European Parliament approved legislation allowing irregular migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected but who cannot be returned to their countries of origin to be deported to third countries.
The new EU rules permit the establishment of migrant detention centres outside the bloc’s borders. African countries are reportedly among the options being discussed for such facilities.
Europe
SpaceX warns EU satellite spectrum plan could disrupt connectivity in Ukraine
SpaceX has sharply criticised a European Union plan to restrict access to satellite spectrum, arguing that the proposal risks degrading connectivity in Ukraine and disrupting emergency communications services.
In a document shared with European officials and reviewed by the Financial Times, SpaceX warned:
“This proposal significantly increases the likelihood that Europeans will be deprived of direct-to-device satellite services, or that new European operations will create global interference issues, including for emergency services such as those operating in Ukraine.”
In a proposal unveiled in May, the EU recommended reserving part of the spectrum band used for direct satellite-to-smartphone connectivity for European operators, thereby limiting the frequencies available to US and Chinese providers.
The 2 GHz frequency band in question is currently used by two US companies, Viasat and EchoStar.
SpaceX argued that the EU plan prioritises “an operator’s country of establishment over economic, technical and regulatory realities.”
When the proposal was announced, EU technology chief Henna Virkkunen defended the move, saying the bloc wanted to “increase European capacity in this sector.” She added that other parts of the frequency band would remain open to international operators, arguing that prioritising European providers was justified.
Other participants involved in discussions over the proposal said some EU officials were specifically seeking to limit Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network.
Europe’s initiative follows a warning from Washington. In March, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) cautioned that it could take retaliatory measures if the EU chose to favour European satellite operators over alternatives such as Starlink.
At the time, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told the Financial Times: “Some of the discussions in Europe regarding satellite sovereignty concern us. If Europe decides to move down that path, then, as you know, we will have to consider reciprocal measures.”
The European Commission’s proposal has not yet entered formal negotiations with EU member states or the European Parliament.
A source close to SpaceX said the company remained hopeful of influencing the outcome of the process, given concerns raised by both businesses and several European governments.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Asia2 weeks agoPentagon adds Alibaba, Baidu and BYD to list of firms with alleged Chinese military ties
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
America2 weeks agoWorld Cup referee from Somalia denied entry to US as immigration scrutiny intensifies
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
America7 days agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoTürkiye calls for Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty, highlights normalization steps with Yerevan
