A photo taken on April 2, 2017, shows Israel’s David’s Sling missile defense system during a ceremony marking its operational launch at the Hatzor Air Force Base.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivered her State of the Union address on September 10, 2025, before the European Parliament—an address that was as controversial as it was familiar. Alongside predictable themes such as unwavering support for Ukraine, clean energy targets, and a stronger European defense, she also addressed Israel.
Von der Leyen proposed sanctions targeting “extremist ministers and violent settlers,” as well as a “partial suspension of the Association Agreement on trade-related matters.” The announcement—intended as a response to the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza—elicited both applause and boos from MEPs. Opinions on Israel remain sharply divided across the political spectrum. But before the EU takes any concrete action, it must ask a difficult question: Is it truly in Europe’s best interest to weaken, even partially, its trade relationship with Israel?
Europe’s Reliance on Israeli Defense and Technology
Critics quickly noted that the EU is Israel’s largest trading partner, accounting for 32% of Israeli trade last year. While cutting ties would disproportionately harm Israel’s economy, Europe would not emerge unscathed. The EU depends on Israel for key defense and dual-use technologies—products whose importance has only grown in light of the bloc’s heightened security concerns.
Between 2020 and 2024, European arms imports from Israel surged 155% compared to the previous five years. Israel has become the eighth-largest arms exporter worldwide, with major European buyers including Germany and the UK. In 2024 alone, Israeli defense exports rose 13%, reaching a record $15 billion. Over half of these exports (54%) were delivered to European countries to bolster their military capabilities.
Germany’s $3.5 billion purchase of the Arrow 3 missile defense system—its largest defense deal to date—is just one example. Finland has acquired the David’s Sling system, and multiple European nations have bought Heron UAVs and precision loitering munitions like the Harop drone.
What makes Israeli technology indispensable is not merely its quality, but the fact that it is combat-proven. Israel’s unique security environment forces constant innovation and real-world testing in air defense, space systems, radars, cyberwarfare, and AI—capabilities Europe cannot easily replicate domestically.
Implications for Ukraine
Cutting back on Israeli defense exports could also undermine Europe’s ability to support Ukraine—ironically, a cause von der Leyen championed in the very same speech.
While Israel has avoided sending weapons directly to Kyiv, its systems still reach Ukraine indirectly. For instance, anti-drone technology sold to Poland has been transferred to Ukraine, where drone warfare has become a defining feature of the conflict. Similarly, Slovenia sent Ukraine M-55S tanks upgraded by Israel’s Elbit Systems.
Even beyond these indirect transfers, European militaries rely on Israeli systems to replenish their own stockpiles after sending older equipment to Ukraine. Europe’s rearmament—and by extension, its continued support for Ukraine—depends in part on Israel’s defense industry.
When Ideology Overrides Competitiveness
This episode is part of a wider pattern in which European policy places moral or ideological considerations above economic and strategic interests. Europe’s competitiveness already lags behind rivals like the U.S. and China. The EU has made costly decisions—jeopardizing its automotive sector in the name of the green transition, rapidly decoupling from Russian energy, and adopting the world’s strictest AI regulations—while its competitors have pursued more pragmatic paths.
While moral debates on Israel and Gaza are valid and complex, Europe risks once again forgetting what others have not: that security and economic self-interest cannot be indefinitely subordinated to ideology.
The Political Backdrop
Von der Leyen’s stance also reflects her precarious political position. She recently survived a no-confidence vote, with both left-leaning and conservative factions competing to unseat her. Though the European Parliament is unlikely to dismiss her and the entire Commission, the vote signals growing discontent across the political spectrum.
Pressure from the Left has been mounting for more aggressive action against Israel. Commission Vice President Teresa Ribera recently called the Gaza situation a “genocide,” further raising the political stakes. With a survey showing 60% of Europeans believe von der Leyen should resign, she may see taking a tougher line on Israel as a way to shore up parliamentary support.
What Lies Ahead
The details of potential sanctions remain uncertain. A partial suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement would likely mean new tariffs rather than a blanket arms embargo. Some member states, such as Ireland and Spain, favor a complete embargo, but such a step would require unanimous approval—an unlikely outcome given opposition from countries like Hungary, Italy, and Germany.
Still, the possibility of more sweeping measures cannot be dismissed, especially if the situation in Gaza worsens or political maneuvering in Brussels escalates. Europeans should recognize that each step toward restricting trade with Israel is not just a moral statement—it also chips away at Europe’s already fragile competitiveness and security posture.