Is the European boycott against Israel turning into a real action?

Writer: Mustafa Ibrahim

In Europe, calls and actions against Israel are increasing amid the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip and the rise of settler terrorism and settlement expansion in the West Bank. What was previously just popular protests, demonstrations, and political statements is gradually transitioning into economic, cultural, and sports measures, raising a larger question: Is the boycott shifting from a tool to pressure the Israeli government to a path for isolating Israel itself?

The latest indicators came from the Netherlands, where the decision to ban the import of settlement products came into effect on September 22, with restrictions imposed on the buying and selling of these products and providing services that assist in their trade. The Dutch government stated that this step aims to align its trade policy with international law, which considers the settlements illegal.

The decision includes products originating from the settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan, while reports about the implementation of these measures on travelers are still limited so far.

The Netherlands is not alone; it was preceded by Spain, Ireland, and Belgium in taking similar actions, while other countries, including Britain and France, announced their intention to impose restrictions on the import of settlement products, against the backdrop of rising settler terrorism and settlement expansion, including the construction plan in the E1 area that connects Jerusalem to the surrounding Ma'ale Adumim settlement.

These steps also come in the context of a clear change in the European discourse towards Israel. In Britain, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband described what is happening in parts of the West Bank as "ethnic cleansing" perpetrated by settlers, stating that the Israeli government turns a blind eye to it, announcing that the official British position has become that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank is illegal. Prime Minister Andy Burnham also stated that his country is no longer willing to stand by and watch what is happening.

These measures are based, in the European discourse, on a clear legal and political stance regarding the settlements, rather than a boycott of Israel as a state. Therefore, it is important not to confuse the boycott of settlement products with a comprehensive boycott of Israel. However, the line between them may become a point of testing if the Israeli government continues its current policies.

Several Israeli diplomats have warned that the government's continuation of its policies could lead to broader sanctions and boycotts, pointing to the experience of South Africa under the apartheid regime, and the possibility that measures could extend from the occupied territories to all of Israel if the current coalition remains in power. Similar concerns are emerging in the financial sector; a former bank inspector in Israel warned of the possibility that sanctions could extend to Israeli companies and the banking and financial system, potentially leading - in an extreme scenario - to restrictions on banking activities with major European banks. However, these warnings remain, for now, Israeli scenarios and not a unified and determined European policy.

The other path does not come only from governments, but also from cultural and sports institutions and broadcasting bodies. European calls for a boycott of Israel in the cultural field have intensified, most notably the controversy surrounding its participation in the Eurovision Song Contest. While the Irish broadcasting authority announced its non-participation in "Eurovision 2027" in protest against Israel's participation, the Dutch public broadcasting authority announced the country's return to the contest.

In sports, calls for a boycott have reached the Irish football team. Despite political calls to cancel the match against Israel, the team decided to play it in Hungary, while reports indicated that goalkeeper Gavin Bazunu withdrew from the squad. The Irish players wore black armbands on their shoulders in protest against the war in Gaza.

The most important question is not whether there is a European boycott today; there are indeed measures and initiatives in various fields, but rather where these measures might lead. Are European governments using sanctions and trade restrictions to pressure Israel to change its policies in Gaza and the West Bank, only to retract them if there is a political change? Or does what is happening reflect a deeper shift in Europe's relationship with Israel, as a result of the growing European public anger over the war and the accompanying violations and settlement policies?

There is support for the first possibility; many of the current measures target settlements and related activities, rather than the entire Israeli economy, which means that the stated goal is to pressure the Israeli government on specific issues, especially settlements. However, there are also indications of a potential widening of the pressure; cultural and sports boycotts target Israel as a whole, while warnings within Israel itself have begun to discuss the possibility of sanctions moving from settlements to broader Israeli economic and financial sectors.

The economic outcome of these measures remains unclear; the European Union is Israel's largest trading partner, with trade between the two exceeding 42 billion euros in 2024, but the trade directly related to settlements is limited compared to total trade.

Therefore, the question is not only about the size of direct economic losses but also about the ability of these measures to change the calculations of the Israeli government. If they remain confined to settlements, they may remain a limited pressure tool. However, if they expand to broader Israeli sectors, especially in economy, finance, culture, and sports, they could shift from isolated measures to a more extensive path of isolation.

So far, there are not enough indicators to say that Europe has made a collective decision to isolate or boycott Israel. But it is also difficult to ignore that something has changed in the European relationship with Israel: the boycott is no longer just a slogan in the street, but has begun to appear, to varying degrees, in government decisions and cultural, sports, and commercial institutions. The coming days, especially after the Israeli elections, may be a real test: will Europe use these measures as a temporary pressure tool, or will it begin to transform them into a long-term policy if Israel continues with the war and settlement activities?