Why Berlin Must Move Beyond Symbolic Sanctions on Israel

For years, German policymakers have invoked Staatsräson—the commitment to Israel’s security born from Holocaust responsibility—to justify unconditional support for successive Israeli governments. This policy has failed to deliver long-term stability. Instead, it has provided cover for the rapid expansion of illegal settlements and the mainstreaming of ideas once confined to the political fringes. Relying on the hope that future Israeli elections will naturally correct this course is a strategic error, as even opposition figures like Gadi Eisenkot oppose the two-state solution and support the settlement project.

The Weight of German Influence

Germany’s reluctance to utilize its economic leverage has stalled collective European action. While the EU-Israel Association Agreement offers clear mechanisms to pressure Israel’s current political trajectory, Berlin has consistently blocked measures ranging from trade restrictions to sanctions on organizations financing settlement expansion. When Germany finally pivoted to support targeted sanctions against violent settlers—after initially insisting on parallel measures against Hamas—it effectively brought holdouts like the Czech Republic and Hungary into alignment. This demonstrates that Berlin’s policy shift is the prerequisite for any meaningful EU action.

Targeting individual ministers like Ben-Gvir is overdue, yet it risks becoming a performative gesture that leaves the broader architecture of occupation intact. The true test of European policy lies not in these symbolic acts, but in whether Berlin is prepared to dismantle the economic structures sustaining settlement expansion. Without a willingness to confront these systemic issues, the EU will continue to squander its substantial economic leverage, ensuring that the prospects for a viable Palestinian state remain under constant, state-sanctioned assault.