Dutch Boycott of West Bank Goods Signals Shifting European Stance
Translated & summarized from Makor Rishon by baba
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Netherlands boycotts West Bank products, inspecting travelers at Schiphol Airport.
- This follows similar bans by Ireland, Spain, Belgium, UK, France, and Canada.
- Israel responded by demanding Dutch diplomats return credentials.
- The economic impact is minimal, but the political and symbolic significance is high.
- The shift to unilateral national bans bypasses EU consensus and Israeli veto power.
- Dutch decision influenced by public pressure, domestic politics, and timing.
The Netherlands has implemented a boycott on products originating from the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights, effective September 22. Dutch customs officials at Schiphol Airport are inspecting passengers arriving from Israel, confiscating items like Golan Heights wine, dates from the Jordan Valley, and olive oil from Gush Etzion. Individuals caught with these products may have them confiscated, and systematic traders face up to six years in prison.
This Dutch measure follows similar actions by Ireland, Spain, and Belgium, with the UK also announcing an import ban in early September. France and Canada have also taken comparable steps. Israel responded by demanding that Dutch diplomats in Ramallah return their issued credentials within a week, leading to a low point in bilateral relations. Israel has also ordered the closure of the British consulate in Jerusalem. The article notes that Israel is now facing diplomatic challenges from seven European capitals simultaneously.
While such boycotts often evoke strong reactions and comparisons to the 1930s, experts estimate the trade volume between the EU and Israeli settlements to be around $89 million annually, a fraction of the total EU-Israel trade. Enforcement is expected to be difficult, as products are rarely labeled as originating from settlements, and circumvention is likely. The primary impact is seen as political and symbolic rather than economic.
Israel's previous strategy of relying on a single EU member state to veto significant EU foreign policy decisions has been circumvented. Countries wishing to impose boycotts, unable to achieve consensus within the EU, have opted for unilateral national measures, as demonstrated by the Netherlands and the UK. This shift moves the struggle to arenas where Israel lacks veto power.
The article attributes the Dutch decision to a confluence of factors. The departure of Geert Wilders' Freedom Party from the government removed a pro-Israel bloc, while public pressure, amplified by the Gaza war, increased significantly. The timing, just before elections and following the collapse of a transitional government, also played a role. Furthermore, targeting settlement products is seen as a low-cost way for politicians to appear active on international law while maintaining support for Israel's security.
The new Dutch government, led by Prime Minister Rob Jetten, inherited the ban as part of its coalition agreement, which committed to maintaining sanctions against the Netanyahu government until significant steps toward peace are taken. The Netherlands is reportedly a primary destination in the EU for West Bank produce. The ban, currently a temporary order set to expire in three years unless codified into law, is dependent on continued public pressure and political timing, suggesting its long-term stability is uncertain, as evidenced by reversals of similar policies in Slovenia and Latin America.
Read the original at Makor RishonMentioned