Ursula von der Leyen has multiplied the gestures of contrition since the leaders of the Twenty-Seven published a full-fledged corrective to their public statements on the Union's position in the face of the latest outbreak of violence in the Middle East, which is far from the common European position. offer Israel unconditional support and not ask it to 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 qualified her messages to stick to the European position, which is very nuanced, in view of the different sensitivities that exist in the EU towards the conflict. Minutes after the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, published on Sunday the position agreed by the Twenty-Seven on the crisis, delving into the principles agreed days before by the Foreign Ministers and in line with the historical position of the EU, Von der Leyen published several tweets and videos with new public statements in which, for the first time, he evoked the need for Israel to act within the law.
Yesterday she reiterated it from Tirana: "The Palestinians of Gaza cannot pay the price of Hamas' barbarity," said Von der Leyen, who added that although Israel has the right to defend itself, it must do so "respecting international humanitarian law." The Commission announced yesterday 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 of allowing the passage of people due to the complicated security situation in the region but sees the agreement on the airlift as a first step in that direction.
For almost a week, the German populace had resisted publicly mentioning the need for Israel to act within respect for 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 simply said that he was confident that the decisions he made 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” that line, “that is why the leaders needed to establish the position.” Now, they add, "what we see is that the Commission has adapted its messages since we issued the statement."
But the incident goes beyond his well-known rivalry with Michel or his bad relations with Josep Borrell, the high representative of Foreign Policy of the EU, the person in charge of representing the European position, as these days have reminded him. His actions have opened an institutional crisis with the Council, creating 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 powers at a time like this but today she will have to give explanations to European leaders at the telematic summit convened by Michel. In his defense, he will argue that in his closed-door meetings with the Israeli Government he did evoke the need to respect international law and will defend the resort to discreet diplomacy, as opposed to public statements and messages on social networks, an argument that is shocking. with his well-known taste for video messages. The analysis of the European Commission following 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 at the regional level.
