The Netherlands strongly condemns Israel... but sanctions are still absent.
The Dutch cabinet condemned the war in Gaza and called for its immediate end, but experts and relief organizations confirm that the government is not utilizing its capabilities to increase pressure on Israel. In a joint statement, the Netherlands and dozens of other countries expressed that "the suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached unprecedented levels," and threatened to take "further steps" if Israel does not stop the war, without clarifying what these steps would be.
The researcher in international relations at Utrecht University, Peter Malcontent, believes that this statement is symbolic and has no actual effect, confirming that the European signatory countries wish to take actual steps, but are hindered by the opposition of some EU member states. Although the European Union acknowledged last month that Israel is violating its trade agreement, it did not impose any tangible consequences, settling for a package of "precautionary" measures, according to the EU's foreign policy chief, Kallas.
The director of Oxfam Novib, Michiel Servaes, described the European stance as "intolerable hypocrisy," stating: "A week ago, governments could have taken clear steps against Israel, but they chose to falter again, at a time when we witness the ongoing genocide in Gaza daily. Issuing such a statement now is a cowardly act." More than a hundred relief and human rights organizations, including Oxfam Novib, have called for an end to the blockade on Gaza through concrete measures, such as halting the delivery of weapons and ammunition, and have urged the United Nations to take over the distribution of aid instead of the controversial GHF organization.
Although imposing sanctions as a single state is difficult, it is not impossible. For example, the Netherlands could stop exporting arms to Israel, or prevent the import of products from illegal Israeli settlements, or officially recognize the State of Palestine. The sanctions expert, David Valentech from Ghent University, pointed out that the Dutch government made a decision in 2023 to stop exporting some products from ASML to China, and this model could be repeated with Israel. Malcontent noted that the Dutch government often responds to these proposals by saying, "This will not be effective," adding that this statement is partially true, but does not prevent countries from acting in accordance with international law.
The Dutch private sector also has a role. Last year, the PFZW pension fund decided to withdraw its investments from Israeli companies listed on the stock exchange. According to an analysis by Stichting Onderzoek Multinationale Ondernemingen (SOMO), the Netherlands is the largest foreign investor in Israel, with about two-thirds of European investments in Israel coming from Dutch companies. Valentik warned that companies severing ties with Israel may face a backlash from the U.S., especially if Trump returns, who may prevent them from entering the American market. On a popular level, individual boycott campaigns against major companies like Starbucks, McDonald's, and Coca Cola have not yielded tangible financial results, and sometimes lead to counterproductive outcomes in terms of reputation. Nevertheless, Valentik points out that these campaigns have moral and ideological value, such as exposing practices and holding companies accountable, which was supported by Malcont, who concluded by saying: "Even if it is not effective, there will come a time when every individual, state, and community must ask: How far will we continue to cross boundaries, and when will we say: No, we do not want to be part of this anymore."