The EU Must Fight the US Embassy Move to Jerusalem

When the US moved its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in May, it set a dangerous precedent that not only encourages Israel to continue its annexation and colonization of Palestinian land, but also invites third states to join it in violating responsibilities under international law. Ten days after the move, Guatemala and Paraguay followed suit and opened embassies in Jerusalem. Honduras has also announced plans to relocate. Normalization of the US move is already underway, with various states, including the United Kingdom (UK), announcing that they will attend meetings in the new embassy.1

The EU has taken a clear position: Prior to the move, the head of the EU delegation to the UN stated that the EU continues to uphold the international consensus on Jerusalem, including refraining from locating diplomatic missions in Jerusalem until the final status of the city has been resolved. Individual EU states reiterated this stance, with France stating that the move contravened international law. Yet the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Romania, all of which attended the opening ceremony of the embassy, blocked a joint EU statement condemning the US move.

Why the EU Matters

These latest political maneuverings in Jerusalem are worrisome, yet they follow a deteriorating trajectory for the Palestinians in the city. Indeed, the international community has long been impotent with regard to securing Palestinian legal and historic rights in both East and West Jerusalem. These include the right of return for refugees, restitution of property, and full political rights. This failure to go beyond rhetoric and statements of condemnation and to implement international law has allowed Israel to entrench its control over the Palestinian people and their land. The recent normalization of Israeli sovereignty in all of Jerusalem by the US and others is particularly dangerous as it yet again sends a message to Israel that it faces no consequences for annexing Palestinian land and, more generally, for violating international law.

EU member states should not attend diplomatic meetings or functions at the site of the new US embassy Share on X

Within this specific context and the global political shift to the right, the European Union (EU) remains one of the few spaces left to pursue Palestinian human rights in the international arena. This is in part because of the EU’s foundational basis in international law and also because of strong European popular support for Palestinian rights and sovereignty. Yet perhaps most importantly, it is because the EU has the capability to hold Israel to account through the various economic, cultural, and scientific agreements they share.

To be sure, the EU faces challenges in this regard. Some EU member states such as Poland and Hungary have authoritarian governments that are closely allied with Israel, while others, including France, Germany, and the UK, have avoided putting pressure on Israel to end its violations of Palestinian rights in favor of maintaining good diplomatic relations. This lack of will to take action has been at the expense of Palestinian rights and challenges the integrity of international law. In this regard, the following policy recommendations are a starting point for the EU to uphold its commitments to the Palestinian people – and to the international legal framework it seeks to uphold.

Immediate Steps for EU Action

1. In light of the blocked joint statement, the EU should encourage its 28 member states to issue independent statements condemning the US embassy move and highlighting the detrimental effect it will have on achieving Palestinian sovereignty and basic human rights.

2. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy should reiterate that EU member states must uphold their third state responsibilities to not aid or abet Israeli war crimes or US violations of international law. This includes stressing that member states should not attend diplomatic meetings or functions at the site of the new US embassy.

3. The EU and its member states must enforce international non-recognition of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem. This includes condemning European events held in Jerusalem such as the cycling race Giro d’Italia and next year’s planned Eurovision song contest. Such events are an important part of Israel’s attempts to normalize its sovereignty over the city.

4. EU member states must both collectively and independently assert Palestinian legal and historic rights in both East and West Jerusalem. They must also support Palestinian resilience and attempts to reclaim sovereignty without depoliticizing them. An important step in this regard would be facilitating the return of PLO institutions to Jerusalem and supporting grassroots organizing.

  1. To read this piece in French, please click here. Al-Shabaka is grateful for the efforts by human rights advocates to translate its pieces, but is not responsible for any change in meaning.
Yara Hawari is Al-Shabaka's co-director. She previously served as the Palestine policy fellow and senior analyst. Yara completed her PhD in Middle East Politics at...

Latest Analysis

 Politics
Since October 2023, Israel’s assault on Gaza has produced one of the most catastrophic humanitarian crises in recent history—an unfolding genocide enabled by world powers and continuing unabated despite the sweeping global solidarity it has sparked. Alongside relentless bombardment and mass displacement, the Israeli regime is waging a deliberate campaign of starvation. In response to this Israeli-manufactured catastrophe, several European states have begun recognizing or signaling their intent to recognize the State of Palestine. Most recently, France announced its intention to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. The UK has stated it will follow suit unless Israel abides by a ceasefire and recommits to a two-state solution. The recent wave of symbolic recognitions that began in 2024 now appears to be the only step many European powers are willing to take in the face of genocide, following nearly two years of moral, material, and diplomatic support for the Israeli regime as well as near-total impunity. This roundtable conversation with Al Shabaka policy analysts Diana Buttu, Inès Abdel Razek, and Al Shabaka’s co-director, Yara Hawari, asks: Why now? What political or strategic interests are driving this wave of recognition? And what does it mean to recognize a Palestinian state, on paper, while leaving intact the structures of occupation, apartheid, and the genocidal regime that sustains them?
 Politics
In March, Israel shattered the ceasefire in Gaza by resuming its bombing campaign at full force and enforcing a total blockade on humanitarian aid—ushering in a new phase of the ongoing genocide. In response to mounting international criticism, the Israeli regime introduced a tightly controlled aid scheme designed not to alleviate suffering, but to obscure its use of starvation as a weapon of collective punishment. Through the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), Israel has transformed humanitarian aid into a tool of control, coercion, and forced displacement. Israeli forces have additionally blocked UN and other aid agencies from accessing over 400 distribution points they once operated throughout Gaza. They consequently forced two million Palestinians to rely on just four GHF sites, most near its southern border in what appears to be a deliberate effort to push mass displacement toward Egypt. Investigations have also revealed how US-based private contractors are actively profiting from the GHF’s deadly operations. In this policy lab, Yara Asi and Alex Feagans join host Tariq Kenney-Shawa to discuss how the GHF fits into Israel’s genocidal strategy—and to expose the network of individuals and companies profiting from what has been a death trap masquerading as humanitarian assistance.
 Politics
​​The October 7, 2023, Al-Aqsa Flood operation aimed to revive Palestinian armed resistance and reassert the cause in Arab and global consciousness after years of marginalization. It dealt a major blow to Israel’s deterrence, rupturing its image as a secure colonial outpost entrusted with protecting Western strategic interests. It also exposed cracks in its militarized social contract that rests on the regime’s ability to protect its settler population. While the operation imposed new political realities on the Israeli regime, it has come at a staggering cost to Palestinian life: Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza has unleashed one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent memory. Yet the anticipated wave of Arab solidarity following the operation failed to materialize or translate into concrete policy shifts. Instead, the moment laid bare the entrenched ties between Arab regimes and Israel’s settler-colonial project that are rooted in mutual interests, regime preservation, and a shared antagonism toward Palestinian resistance. This commentary argues that these alliances—sustained by repression and strategic-economic cooperation and reinforced by Western complicity—transformed a potential turning point for isolating the Israeli regime into an opening for intensified colonial expansion and regional dominance.
Al-Shabaka Tariq Dana
Tariq Dana· Jul 22, 2025
Skip to content