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 the University of Exeter, where she taught various undergraduate courses and continues to be an honorary research fellow. In addition to her academic work, which focused on indigenous studies and oral history, she is a frequent political commentator writing for various media outlets including The Guardian, Foreign Policy, and Al Jazeera English.

Latest Analysis

 Politics
As the US and Israel escalate their assault on Iran, the Israeli regime has been constructing a war economy to sustain prolonged military campaigns while evading accountability. In September 2025, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged Israelis to transform the country into a “Super Sparta” of the Middle East—more militarized, economically self-reliant, and capable of sustaining protracted conflict despite mounting external pressure. This policy brief argues that this rhetoric reflects an emerging doctrine: a political-economic project structured around permanent national mobilization, preventative warfare, and accelerated defense-industrial expansion. Yet the Israeli regime’s shift toward self-reliance is not producing full autarky. Instead, the war economy is consolidating into a hybrid model that combines domestic substitution in critical defense sectors with deeper integration into transnational supply networks, thereby dispersing sanctions risk. This configuration blunts the impact of conventional accountability tools, such as fragmented or weakly enforced arms embargoes. As a result, effective international responses must move beyond traditional sanctions frameworks and instead target the material infrastructure and dependency nodes that sustain Israel’s war economy.
Ahmed Alqarout· Mar 11, 2026
 Politics
Noura Erakat and Jake Romm joined us for a policy lab episode on how Gaza helped shatter the old status quo and what that break reveals about the world being built in its wake.
 Civil Society
On November 4, 2025, the UK government tabled an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill to curtail protest rights under the pretext of “cumulative disruption.” The revised Bill is now in the House of Lords Committee, where it is scrutinized before advancing toward final approval. The amendment signals a profound shift in how the state regulates public protest. While the government presents the Bill as a neutral public order measure, it emerges directly from sustained national demonstrations for Palestinian rights and introduces new legal concepts that threaten long-established democratic freedoms. This roundtable examines the Bill’s political drivers, legal architecture, and wider implications for social movements and civil liberties in the UK. It shows that the amendment is not simply a public order measure; it is a coordinated political and legal project to narrow the space for dissent in the UK. While Palestinian solidarity is the immediate target of the crackdown on freedom of assembly, the roundtable argues that the consequences will reverberate across labor organizing, racial justice, climate activism, and broader democratic participation.