While decrying Trump’s distortions on Ukraine, EU foreign chief Kallas bought into Netanyahu’s spin aimed at derailing the Gaza deal. Here’s why the EU must avoid such missteps.
10 March 2025
By Martin Konecny
On 2 March, at a critical moment in the faltering Gaza ceasefire, the EU High Representative Kaja Kallas issued a statement that left many observers in disbelief.
Released in the name of Kallas’ spokesperson, Anouar El Anouni, the statement came just as the first phase of the ceasefire deal expired, Israel stalled the transition to phase two, and halted the entry of all humanitarian aid into Gaza.
Yet, the statement begins as follows: “The EU condemns the refusal of Hamas to accept the extension of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza. Israel’s subsequent decision to block the entry of all humanitarian aid into Gaza could potentially result in humanitarian consequences.”
There are two glaring problems here. First, blaming Hamas for undermining the ceasefire turns the reality upside down. For all its faults, Hamas largely adhered to the terms of the ceasefire and hostage release deal. It is Israel that has been violating the agreement, as pointed out by numerous Israeli and international observers. As summed up by the Haaretz military correspondent Amos Harel, “it isn’t withdrawing from the Philadelphi corridor, it rescinded its commitment to end the fighting and it isn’t willing to begin the deal’s second phase”. Critics also contend that Israel has allowed far fewer than the agreed number of tents and mobile homes into the war-torn zone, restricted patient evacuations through the Rafah crossing, and continued incursions and strikes that have killed dozens of Gazans after the ceasefire took effect.
Second, the EU’s phrasing – that Israel’s “subsequent” blocking of all aid “could potentially have humanitarian consequences”, with no condemnation – severely downplays the gravity of Israel’s denial of critical supplies to two million people in the context of an already ongoing humanitarian catastrophe. It is worth recalling that the International Criminal Court has charged Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu with war crimes and crimes against humanity precisely for such blocking of humanitarian aid vital to the survival of Gaza’s civilian population.
Taken together, Kallas’ words read almost as an endorsement of Israel’s justification to cut off aid to Gaza – as criticised in a statement by a group of UN independent human rights experts.
Moreover, the EU foreign policy chief’s message plays right into Netanyahu’s strategy to derail the ceasefire and shift the blame onto Hamas. From day one of the ceasefire in mid-January, Israeli commentators have warned that Netanyahu would try to collapse the deal in order to preserve his governing coalition – whose more radical elements seek to resume the war, resettle Gaza, and expel the Palestinian population, even at the cost of sacrificing the Israeli hostages.
And that is indeed what happened.
On the morning of 2 March, as the ceasefire’s first phase expired, Netanyahu announced that Israel accepts a proposal by US envoy Steve Witkoff that changes the terms of the deal. Instead of proceeding to phase two as initially agreed, the “Witkoff proposal” – according to Netanyahu – would frontload the release of half the remaining Israeli hostages while delaying Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, thus tilting the deal in favour of the Netanyahu government and creating more space to resume the war.
After Hamas denounced Netanyahu’s statement as a breach of the signed agreement, the Israeli Prime Minister released a second announcement, stating that in light of “Hamas’s refusal to accept the Witkoff framework”, Israel would halt the entry of all aid to Gaza.
At no point did the Americans publicly confirm the existence of such a proposal by Witkoff, saying only that they supported Israel’s actions. A Hamas official was reported saying that no such proposal had even been formally presented to the group before Israel accused it of rejecting it.
Nevertheless, later that same day, Kallas’ spokesperson condemned “the refusal of Hamas to accept the extension of the first phase”, effectively buying into Netanyahu’s narrative.
In contrast, Egypt and Qatar, the two mediators besides the US, issued statements condemning Israel’s aid denial as a violation of the ceasefire. Qatar also urged sticking to the existing deal and appeared to dismiss any talk of a new proposal. Foreign ministers of the E3 (France, Germany and the UK) later expressed a “deep concern” over Israel’s aid blockade and urged “all parties” to negotiate the subsequent phases of the deal. The only one who fell into Netanyahu’s trap and parroted his Hamas-blaming narrative was Kallas.
Kallas’ statement also contradicts itself. After its misleading opening, the rest of the statement correctly calls for “a rapid resumption of negotiations on the second phase of the ceasefire”, thus falling back in line with the existing framework.
Some might say the EU’s position does not matter as it is not at the negotiating table. But it does matter in the war on truth. To justify derailing the ceasefire, Netanyahu needs the West to put the blame on Hamas regardless of the facts. Hence the imperative for Europe to be vigilant and call out the facts as they stand.
Ironically, Kallas bought into Netanyahu’s spin on Gaza just as Europe decried US President Trump’s distortion of facts about the Ukraine war. Only a few days earlier, Kallas herself accused Trump of falling for the Russian narrative on Ukraine.
Gaza’s fate keeps hanging in the balance. One path leads toward ending the war, releasing all Israeli hostages, and rebuilding the devastated enclave. The other leads to a renewed military assault, mass displacement and starvation, sacrificing the hostages, and paving the way for Trump’s “clean out” plan. If the EU and its foreign policy chief want to help the former and avoid facilitating the latter, they must not make such missteps again.