EU increasingly hostile towards Israel since October 7, study finds

The European Union’s rhetoric towards Israel has become significantly more critical since October 7, study finds, with more criticism directed towards the Jewish state than any other country except Iran.

By World Israel News Staff

Official European Union rhetoric toward Israel has become sharply more negative since Hamas’ October 7 invasion and the war in Gaza, according to a new study by the Jewish People Policy Institute.

The study analyzed more than 24,000 press releases and official statements issued by EU institutions between 2017 and 2026, including publications from the European External Action Service, the bloc’s diplomatic arm.

Researchers filtered and reviewed 3,584 relevant EU publications, including 895 that dealt directly with Israel. Using AI-based sentiment analysis, they classified the statements as positive, neutral or negative.

Across the full period examined, 38% of EU statements about Israel were classified as negative, 49% as neutral and 13% as positive.

But the study found a sharp shift after October 7. Before the Hamas-led attack, 29% of EU statements about Israel were classified as negative. After October 7, that figure rose to nearly 46%, an increase of almost 60%.

Positive statements fell from nearly 20% before October 7 to 8% afterward, while neutral statements dropped from 51% to 46%.

The study said that in the early stages of the war, EU statements included condemnations of Hamas, recognition of Israel’s right to self-defense and calls for the release of hostages. But as the war in Gaza continued, European rhetoric became increasingly critical of Israel over the humanitarian situation in the Strip, settlement activity and the situation in Judea and Samaria.

Some EU statements included warnings about mass hunger in Gaza, calls for a ceasefire and direct criticism of ministers in the Israeli government, according to the study.

JPPI also found that more than half of EU statements about Israel — 50.1% — included language tied to the two-state solution, including references to two states or a Palestinian state. The institute said the finding shows that the issue remains a consistent and central theme in EU foreign policy, even as those terms are used far less frequently in Israeli political discourse.

The study compared Israel with other countries with strategic ties to the EU, including Iran, China, Turkey and Qatar.

It found that Iran receives even more negative treatment than Israel in EU statements, with the tone toward Tehran worsening over the past decade.

But the researchers said criticism of Iran was linked mainly to direct security threats to Europe, particularly Iranian support for Russia in its war against Ukraine, while criticism of Israel focused largely on the Palestinian issue and humanitarian and legal concerns.

Qatar, by contrast, received especially favorable treatment. More than two-thirds of EU publications dealing with Qatar were classified as positive, and researchers found almost no negative official statements toward Doha.

Turkey was treated mostly neutrally, with about 75% of EU statements classified as neutral, 10% as negative and 15% as positive.

The JPPI noted that this was the case despite concerns over democratic backsliding, human rights violations and the persecution of opposition figures, journalists and academics under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

JPPI President Prof. Yedidia Stern said the findings point to a broader deterioration in Europe’s posture toward Jews and Israel.

“Europe, the continent that was once home to most of the Jewish people, is now turning its back on the Jews,” Stern said.

He said antisemitism was becoming more frequent and intense in European streets, while some national parliaments were advancing laws that could restrict Jewish religious life, including bans on circumcision and kosher slaughter.

“The current study teaches that it is not only the street and specific countries, but also the European Union itself that is applying a negative double standard in its attitude toward the State of Israel,” Stern said.

Stern said Israel should make a concentrated effort to reverse the trend.

“It is not enough to rely on public diplomacy,” he said. “The threat must be treated for what it is: a threat to the national security of the State of Israel.”

Prof. Sharon Pardo, a JPPI senior fellow and EU expert, said the study also showed a gap between the EU’s critical rhetoric and its practical policy toward Israel.

Pardo noted that Israel remains the EU’s 27th-largest trading partner and its third-largest partner in the Mediterranean basin. The EU is Israel’s largest trading partner, accounting for about 32% of Israel’s goods trade, and is also Israel’s largest partner in research and science.

He said that until recently, the EU had struggled to turn its criticism of Israel into significant operational steps, in part because of opposition from Hungary under Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

But Pardo warned that political changes inside EU member states could now affect the bloc’s ability to translate critical rhetoric into policy measures against Israel.

“The European Union must adopt a more balanced, substantive and positive approach toward the State of Israel if it wants to be a significant and credible player at the regional negotiating table,” Pardo said.