Analysis of European Union Statements – Summary

Background

For years, despite the European Union’s critical rhetoric toward Israel, Hungary’s veto under Viktor Orbán prevented the EU from adopting operational measures against Israel. As a result, the Israeli public felt the practical consequences of EU criticism less acutely. This changed after Orbán’s electoral defeat, when Hungary lifted its veto. This study was therefore undertaken to examine the trend in depth and trace the EU’s attitude toward Israel over time. Its principal aim was to determine how that attitude changed after October 7. The study also compares Israel with several other countries that maintain ties with the EU but are not EU member states. The analysis is based on EU statements and media interviews published on the European External Action Service website.¹

Methodology

The methodology addresses the following elements: Data source, Data processing and noise reduction, Analysis. Using software tools, more than 24,000 statements published from 2017 through the end of April 2026 were downloaded. Statements concerning selected countries were then identified. After cleaning and deduplication, the dataset contained 3,584 statements concerning Israel, Iran, China, Turkey, and Qatar, including 895 on Israel.

Data Processing and Noise Reduction

The purpose was to filter out website items that constituted “noise,” such as pages containing no substantive content. Duplicate items were also removed. One concern was that identical content might have been published in several languages. A preliminary AI-assisted review, however, indicated that non-English publications were negligible in number; only English-language statements were therefore included.

Analysis

As noted, the comparison covered Israel, Iran, China, Turkey, and Qatar. Using the ChatGPT 5.2 model, an AI-assisted tone (sentiment) analysis assessed the attitude toward the country in question expressed by the EU’s official representative in each statement. Each statement received a sentiment score ranging from -1 to 1. Scores from -0.25 to 0.25 were classified as neutral; scores above 0.25 as positive; and scores below -0.25 as negative.

Findings on Israel

A relatively high share – 38.2% of statements concerning Israel is negative. This share is nevertheless lower than the corresponding share for Iran, unlike, for example, the analysis of statements by the UN secretary-general that we recently published. We next examine attitudes toward Israel over time.

Tone Before and After October 7

The two periods are January 2019 through October 6, 2023, and October 7, 2023, through the end of April 2026. The share of negative statements concerning Israel rose by nearly 60%, while the share of positive statements fell by more than half.

Average Annual Sentiment Toward Israel

The graph shows a pronounced shift in average annual sentiment toward Israel after 2023. The conclusion is unequivocal: the EU’s attitude toward Israel has become considerably more critical.

Additional Finding

Of the statements concerning Israel examined, 50.1% contained keywords related to the two-state solution, including “two states,” “Palestinian state,” and “peace process.” This finding illustrates the issue’s importance to the EU and the recurrence of this rhetoric across its statements.

Selected Examples Concerning Israel

Positive

Israel joins Horizon Europe Research & Innovation Programme EEAS. This item announces Israel’s accession to the Horizon Europe program, which enables Israeli researchers to participate in the EU’s research and innovation program. Issued on December 7, 2021, it praises Israel and its high level of participation in European innovation programs.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/japan/european-commission-announces-urgent-review-its-financial-assistance-palestine_en. The statement unequivocally condemns Hamas’s actions in Israel on October 7. The European Commission also announces an immediate review of EU assistance to the Palestinians to ensure that it does not indirectly support terrorist activity targeting Israel.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/ukraine/statement-high-representative-behalf-european-union-attacks-against-israel_en. A second statement, issued on October 9, unequivocally condemns Hamas, expresses solidarity with Israel, and affirms Israel’s right to self-defense in accordance with international law. Although brief, the statement is strongly supportive of Israel.

Neutral

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/eu-gulf-cooperation-council-opening-remarks-high-representative-josep-borrell-joint-ministerial_en. In this statement, issued on October 10, 2023, Josep Borrell expresses empathy for Israel and notes that he spoke with the foreign minister. At the same time, he tells Eli Cohen that international law must be respected and that further civilian deaths must be prevented. He also notes that both Israelis and Palestinians have been killed.

“And I think that the priority now is to stop the violence, to de-escalate, to protect civilians and the release of all hostages. The balance of these days is awful, unbearable. Over 900 Israelis and we do not know, maybe 700 Palestinians – but the number is growing by the hour have been killed, in addition to thousands of injured on both sides.” His remarks therefore imply a reciprocal call for de-escalation. The statement accordingly received a neutral rather than positive sentiment score.

Negative

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-geneva/hrc55-item-4-general-debate-human-rights-situations-require-council%E2%80%99s-attention_en. This statement adopts a negative tone toward Israel, criticizing the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. It warns of the risk of famine and the collapse of the health-care system, and raises concerns about the delivery of humanitarian aid. It calls on all parties to protect civilians, warns against a possible Israeli operation in Rafah, and states that military action must be proportionate. It also condemns settler violence, criticizes the settlements, and describes them as illegal. The tone toward Israel is therefore negative. Nevertheless, the statement contains balancing elements: it affirms Israel’s right to self-defense, condemns Hamas, notes that Hamas uses civilians as human shields, and refers to Hamas’s sexual violence on October 7.

“The EU remains gravely concerned about the situation in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. The EU firmly condemns settler violence. Settlements are illegal under international law and constitute an obstacle to peace. Israel must stop settlement expansion, evictions, demolitions, confiscations and forced transfers, prevent settler violence and ensure that perpetrators are held accountable.”

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/israelgaza-statement-high-representative-remarks-minister-smotrich-regarding-starving-civilians_en. This statement condemns Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich for his remarks: “Minister Smotrich saying that ‘it might be justified and moral’ to let Israel ’cause 2 million civilians to die of hunger’ until the ‘hostages are returned.”

The statement strongly condemns Smotrich’s remarks and calls on the Israeli government to repudiate them and conduct a transparent investigation into the events at Sde Teiman. It states that hundreds of thousands of Gazans are exposed to hunger and disease, and calls for an immediate ceasefire and a substantial increase in the aid entering the Gaza Strip. Unlike the previous example, this statement contains no balancing references to Israel’s right to self-defense or criticism of Hamas.

Israel/Palestine: Statement by the Spokesperson on settlements in the West Bank EEAS. Issued on January 16, 2026, this statement strongly condemns the expansion of construction in the West Bank. It argues that the policy is an obstacle to peace and also criticizes settler violence. Here too, there is no balancing formulation affirming Israel’s security needs or making a comparable point.

Analyses Not Directly Related to Israel

Iran Over Time

The EU’s tone toward Iran has become markedly more critical over time. One possible reason is Iran’s support for Russia, as illustrated by the following statement, which is highly critical of Iran: G7 Foreign Ministers’ Statement | EEAS.

“Iran must immediately cease all support to Russia’s illegal and unjustifiable war against Ukraine and halt such transfers of ballistic missiles, UAVs and related technology, which constitute a direct threat to the Ukrainian people as well as European and international security more broadly.” In other words, the statement argues that Iran’s support for Russia ultimately threatens Europe’s own security. It was issued on September 14, 2024.

Qatar

Qatar generally receives relatively favorable treatment from the EU. Few statements are critical of Qatar or adopt a negative tone. Several examples follow.

Positive

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/qatar-press-remarks-high-representativevice-president-josep-borrell-after-meeting-prime_en. “I appreciate a lot the constructive role that Qatar is playing as a regional power with much capacity in fostering peace and stability.” In this statement, issued on November 11, 2023 after October 7, Josep Borrell describes Qatar as contributing to regional peace and stability.

Neutral

EU-ASEAN: Press remarks by High Representative Josep Borrell ahead of the EU-ASEAN Commemorative Summit | EEAS. In this example, a journalist asks whether the EU will maintain relations with Qatar if Qatar is found to have bribed EU politicians. Josep Borrell avoids the question, stating only that Qatar will not be represented at the day’s meeting. “Qatar is not going to be present today, in this meeting.”

Negative

Foreign Affairs Council: Press remarks by High Representative Josep Borrell upon arrival | EEAS. Here too, a journalist asks Borrell about allegations that Qatar sought to bribe members of the European Parliament and about the possible consequences. Borrell responds that he is deeply concerned. The statement therefore received a negative score, although it contains no unequivocal criticism of Qatar.

“Q. Apparently, Qatar tries to influence, tries to buy Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). What does this mean for the relationship with Qatar and what should be the consequences? Look, as you said: ‘apparently.’ I am not a judge, there is a process ongoing. Certainly, the news are very worrisome, very, very worrisome.”

Turkey

Turkey was included because it is an EU candidate country with extensive ties to the Union. Most statements concerning Turkey are neutral, in part because many simply list Turkey among the countries that are candidates for EU membership.

Positive

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/vienna-international-organisations/osce-permanent-council-1410-vienna-09-february-2023_en. This statement concerns the earthquake in Turkey and the assistance provided in its aftermath.

Neutral

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-new-york/eu-statement-united-nations-security-council-open-debate-silencing-guns_en. This is a frequently recurring type of example in which Turkey is mentioned as one of the countries seeking EU membership.

Negative

Statement by the Spokesperson on the case of Turkish journalist Ahmet Altan EEAS. This statement criticizes Turkey following the arrest of journalist Ahmet Altan on November 13, 2019.

Summary and Conclusions

The EU has significantly intensified its criticism of Israel since October 7, despite having initially expressed strong solidarity with the country. At the same time, several formulations recur throughout its statements: Recognition of Israel’s right to self-defense, Calls for the release of the hostages during the war, Repeated references to Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack.

The EU also occasionally notes that Hamas uses civilians as human shields. These formulations have not prevented it from criticizing Israel over conditions in the Gaza Strip. Some of the criticism also concerns developments in the West Bank. More than 50% of the statements include references related to the two-state solution – a term now used by almost no Israeli politicians.

With regard to Iran, Israel can, in my view, leverage Iran’s participation in the war against Ukraine as a diplomatic tool – demonstrating that Israel is fighting a sponsor of terrorism whose activities ultimately harm Europe as well.

Endnotes

¹ European External Action Service website: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/

² Page with no substantive content: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/test-press-alert-2_en