Ursula von der Leyen has multiplied the gestures of contrition since the leaders of the Twenty-Seven issued a full-blown correction to their public statements about the Union’s position in the face of the latest outbreak of violence in the Middle East, far of the common European position, as it offered Israel unconditional support and did not demand that it respect international law in its response to Hamas.
Although her spokesperson insists that the president of the European Commission “can travel wherever she wants”, the former German Defense Minister has taken note of the criticism and has adapted her messages to stick to the European position, which is very nuanced , in view of the various sensitivities in the EU towards the conflict. Minutes after Sunday the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, published the position agreed by the Twenty-seven on the crisis in accordance with the principles agreed days before by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and in line with the historic position of the EU , Von der Leyen released several tweets and videos with new public statements in which, for the first time, she evokes the need for Israel to act within the law.
Yesterday he reiterated it from Tirana: “The Palestinians of Gaza cannot pay the price of the barbarity of Hamas”, said Von der Leyen, who added that while Israel has the right to defend itself, it must do so ” respecting international humanitarian law”. Yesterday, the Commission announced an agreement with the Egyptian authorities to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. The first two flights will leave this week, but for now the material will have to stay in the Sinai desert, waiting for the Rafah crossing to open. Brussels is not optimistic about the possibility that they will allow the passage of people, due to the complicated security situation in the region, but sees the agreement on the air bridge as a first step in this direction.
For nearly a week, the German people had resisted publicly mentioning the need for Israel to act within respect of international law, and on Friday, as Washington and other capitals maneuvered to contain the Israeli response, Von der Leyen met in Tel-Aviv with Netanyahu and limited himself to saying that he was confident that the decisions he took would demonstrate that the country “is a democracy”.
European governments stopped him on Sunday. “The important thing is that it is clear that the EU is not a kingdom, that it is a construction based on laws and we have procedures. We have a treaty that says that the European Council sets foreign policy and that the Council of Foreign Ministers ensures its application”, European diplomatic sources involved in the discussions with the capitals commented yesterday. “What was being said did not respect” this line, “which is why it was necessary for the leaders to set the position”. Now, they add, “what we see is that the Commission has adapted its messages since we made the declaration”.
But the incident goes beyond his well-known rivalry with Michel or his bad relations with Josep Borrell, the high representative of the EU’s Foreign Policy, the person in charge of representing the European position, as these days have reminded him. His action has opened an institutional crisis with the Council, it has created confusion in the region and in the Global South, where his words have been interpreted as a double standard when judging Russia and Israel.
Von der Leyen does not feel like talking about institutional issues and competences at a time like this, but today he will have to give explanations to the European leaders at the telematic summit called by Michel. In his defense, he will argue that in the closed-door meetings with the Israeli Government he did appeal to the need to respect international law and will defend the recourse to discreet diplomacy, following the public statements and messages on the networks social networks, an argument that clashes with his well-known taste for video messages. The European Commission’s analysis after last week’s visit to Israel and contacts with countries in the region indicates that there is a high risk of escalation in the conflict on a regional scale.
