In the United Nations Assembly vote last December 13, Israel called for a ceasefire in the Gaza region. The move underscored the deep split among the 27 EU member states over how to respond to the ongoing Middle East crisis. Seventeen EU members backed the call, eight abstained, and two opposed it. The divide resurfaced at the Council of Europe, where leaders in Brussels discussed the ceasefire request during a two-day summit. The document ultimately approved by the Twenty-Seven reflected a cautious stance, stating that the European Council had held an in-depth strategic discussion on the Middle East. They had already agreed at the previous summit to endorse humanitarian pauses, while some members proposed bolder steps that remain under discussion, according to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Diplomatic sources noted friction among delegations, which led President Michel to end the debate without a joint declaration. On Thursday, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, asked if he supported a ceasefire, responded that he did not. Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia joined Austria and the Czech Republic in voting against the measure. The outcome highlighted how far European leaders were from a united stance, despite mounting pressure from countries like Spain, Belgium, Ireland, and Malta, which sent a letter to European Council President Charles Michel urging a serious discussion and a humanitarian ceasefire.
With capitals reluctant to go beyond established norms, the bloc’s leadership refrained from a new common language. The push for humanitarian pauses and a broader ceasefire remains a live topic as European diplomacy weighs humanitarian needs against security concerns. The call for a serious, collective reflection on the southern neighbourhood is part of a broader effort to reassess regional policy in light of current events in the Middle East.
Humane aid
There are clearly divergent positions within European Council members regarding humanitarian pauses versus full ceasefires. Yet the emphasis remains on keeping civilian aid accessible and accelerating relief initiatives. Spain’s leadership signaled a desire to push further, seeking a strategic review of the southern neighbourhood to better understand the broader regional dynamics. What is happening in the Middle East should prompt Europe to reevaluate its approach to neighboring regions. The essential aim, as articulated by EU leadership, is to ensure robust humanitarian aid to Gaza and to expand relief corridors, including sea routes where feasible. The European Commission has already been active since October 7, coordinating flights and shipments of humanitarian relief, with 28 flights and 1,200 tons already delivered and more planned by year’s end (as reported by the Commission).
Observers note that it is possible to pursue counterterrorism goals without escalating civilian suffering or engaging in a broader war. European governments share concerns about terrorism and have not endorsed actions that mirror the current Gaza campaign. Ireland’s prime minister, Leo Varadkar, acknowledged at the meeting that Europe’s stance had improved since October, although he cautioned that a durable agreement would require careful consideration of language and objectives. The prevailing sentiment is that a measured, principled approach should guide European action while keeping the door open to stronger humanitarian measures if conditions allow.
From the Belgian prime minister to other European leaders, there is a consistent call to end the human suffering on all sides. The focus is on ensuring unhindered humanitarian access, securing the release of hostages where possible, and pressing for an immediate cessation of hostilities. The shared objective is to alleviate civilian hardship while maintaining a clear, united position on core security concerns. The ongoing debate reflects the complexity of balancing moral imperatives with strategic realities, a challenge that remains at the heart of European diplomacy across the Middle East.