Should Luxembourg impose its own sanctions against Israel? In view of the brutal war in Gaza and rampant settler violence in the West Bank, the question has been on the table for months. There is no clear course within the EU: countries such as Spain, Ireland and the Netherlands have long been pushing for tough sanctions, while other states are holding back. As a unified EU approach remains elusive, national solo efforts take centre stage.
Netanyahu submits formal request for pardon to Israeli president
This has already happened in some member states. Spain and the Netherlands, for example, have issued an entry ban against the two right-wing extremist Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir (minister of national security) and Bezalel Smotrich (minister of finance). The Grand Duchy is much more reluctant to take such steps, as emerged from a meeting of the foreign affairs committee. Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel reported there on Monday morning on the status of possible national sanctions.
I believe that we cannot always go it alone if we want a European foreign policy; we should think and act in a European way
Laurent Zeimet
MP and vice president of the Chamber of Deputies Foreign Affairs Commission
The Grand Duchy has very little room for manoeuvre. Import bans, for example on products from the occupied Palestinian territories, cannot be implemented due to the EU internal market; according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Luxembourg has no means of action here. Instead, a decision is needed at EU level.
Ukraine and European allies warn US against rush to end Russia’s war
Possible bans could be circumvented by Israeli manufacturers moving their products out of the occupied territories during the manufacturing process, the foreign ministry told the Luxemburger Wort. Handling in Luxembourg would also be problematic: “Strict enforcement would be impossible for customs, as the products are not delivered directly to Luxembourg, but enter via other EU member states.”
What is conceivable, however, would be entry restrictions against individuals. This would first require a legal basis, which is why there are talks between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of the Interior, which is in charge, according to the information provided. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the Ministry of Finance is responsible for sanctions in the financial sector.
The foreign ministry explains that the entry ban initiated by the Netherlands for ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich applies throughout the Schengen area and therefore also in Luxembourg. However, a Luxembourg entry ban could also be applied in the future, regardless of the Israeli context.
Opposition claims lack of courage
Within the Chamber of Deputies commission, Bettel’s comments were received differently. The commission vice president, Laurent Zeimet, was very cautious about sanctions in an interview with Wort. “I am of the opinion that we cannot always go it alone if we want a European foreign policy; we should think and act in a European way.” He warned against “pillorying Israel even more than has already happened”. However, he welcomes the creation of a legal basis for future sanctions, irrespective of the case of Israel.
Xavier Bettel files complaint over activist Instagram post
Opposition party voices are much more critical. “A clear signal at national level would have been desirable,” said LSAP MP Liz Braz. She describes Foreign Minister Bettel’s decision to shift responsibility to EU level as “cowardly”. Above all because the foreign minister wants to delegate responsibility for possible entry bans on Israeli citizens to the interior minister, Léon Gloden, and make the finance minister, Gilles Roth, responsible for any financial sanctions.
It is becoming increasingly clear to me that our foreign policy lacks the necessary courage
Liz Braz (LSAP)
Member of Parliament
In his report to the committee, Bettel dismissed national sanctions as ineffective, symbolic policy. “But, I believe that symbolic policy can also have a certain weight, especially in foreign policy,” said Braz.
Accepting irritation with Israel
Braz is critical that, even within the Benelux alliance, there is no unified approach. “Given the central role of the Dutch ports for the movement of goods, it would have been obvious for these three countries to agree on a common regulation – such as mandatory labelling of products from occupied territories. That would at least have been a first step towards sanctions.”
CSSF had discretion to refuse Israel bonds but found ‘no valid argument’
Similar to the recognition of Palestine as a sovereign state, Luxembourg’s foreign policy has also shown itself to be inconsistent and too hesitant on the issue of sanctions against Israel, according to Braz, who describes “a stalling policy without a leader who can make decisions and represent Luxembourg to the outside world with strong positions.”
“It is becoming increasingly clear to me that our foreign policy lacks the necessary courage,” said Braz. Any diplomatic irritations with Israel would have to be accepted in the event of nationally imposed sanctions. “I can imagine that national sanctions could lead to diplomatic tensions and that conversations with the Israeli ambassador might be less pleasant in future as a result. But that is a relatively small price to pay compared to the importance of a clear political stance,” Braz concluded.
(This article was published by the Luxemburger Wort. Machine translated, with editing and adaptation by Alex Stevensson.)
