On May 20, the European Foreign Affairs Council will convene to discuss whether Israel still complies with the conditions of Article 2 of the Association Agreement with the European Union. That article is not a technical clause, but a fundamental principle: respect for human rights and democratic principles is the foundation on which cooperation with third countries rests. If this foundation is systematically violated, it must have consequences. Otherwise, our European treaties risk becoming hollow words.

For months, Israel has been conducting a devastating military offensive in Gaza. The images and numbers speak for themselves: tens of thousands of civilian casualties, systematic destruction of civilian infrastructure, blockades on humanitarian aid, and a growing famine. Meanwhile, repression in the occupied West Bank continues unabated: home demolitions, arbitrary arrests, violent settler attacks, and the expansion of illegal settlements. Various reports from the United Nations and human rights organizations have extensively and unequivocally documented these violations. The International Court of Justice previously ruled that Israel must take all measures to protect Palestinians in the Gaza Strip from the risk of genocide by ensuring adequate basic services and humanitarian aid.

Despite this overwhelming evidence, Europe remains unbearably silent. More than twenty years ago, Article 2 was included in the Association Agreement to place values such as human rights, democracy, and the rule of law at the center of the EU’s foreign policy. But those values are only credible if our partners are held accountable to them. It cannot be the case that those values matter less depending on how strategic or sensitive the partner is.

That uncomfortable truth erodes our international credibility. Yet it is the stated policy ambition of EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to give more weight to human rights and to make them, along with security, a cornerstone of European foreign policy. That ambition is irreconcilable with the current silence.

Our Belgian universities are increasingly confronted with this contradiction. Europe recognizes Israel as a full partner under the bilateral Association Agreement. This means, among other things, that Israeli academic institutions — even those that are part of the Israeli state apparatus — can participate in the large-scale European research and innovation program Horizon Europe. Participating organizations are expected, under Article 14 of the model agreement, to act in accordance with the “highest ethical standards” and the fundamental values of the EU: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and human rights. In theory, this is clear. In practice, it is problematic.

In response to the atrocities in the occupied Palestinian territories, Belgian universities have repeatedly asked the European Commission to provide a transparent and effective ethical screening framework. Such a framework would make it possible to assess whether the content of research projects poses a risk of human rights violations, and whether the (intended) project partners are complicit in such violations. To this day, however, the Commission’s response remains limited to a minimalist reading of Article 14: potential structural unethical behavior of a partner institution is ignored, with only the risks inherent to the content of the project being examined.

Belgian universities are heavily investing in ethical screening, but they lack the leverage to translate the conclusions into concrete action. Unilateral withdrawal from consortia or — if necessary — excluding Israeli partners from approved projects leads to legal uncertainty, potential compensation claims, and reputational damage. Without a clear European framework, it is nearly impossible to legally justify morally responsible choices.

In the current situation, which continues to escalate, we call on the European Commission to go a step further and suspend the Association Agreement with Israel. Suspending the agreement is not an extreme demand but a logical consequence of the treaty’s own provisions. Article 2 states that cooperation is “essentially based” on respect for human rights. If that condition is systematically violated by the association partner, then suspension is not only politically necessary, but also legally justified.

We urge the Belgian government to advocate for this suspension during the upcoming Council. Additionally, we request that Belgium push the European Commission to develop a transparent, structural, and independent human rights framework for evaluating all international partnerships under Horizon Europe and other European programs. Belgian universities are prepared to share their experiences and to constructively contribute to solutions. But that requires clear political choices.

The European Union can only maintain its moral authority if it is willing to take its own values seriously — even when it is uncomfortable. Holding Israel accountable for ongoing human rights violations is not an ideological stance, but a moral and legal necessity.

Annick Castiaux (UNamur), Jan Danckaert (VUB), Philippe Dubois (UMons), Herwig Leirs (UAntwerpen), Anne-Sophie Nyssen (ULiège), Annemie Schaus (ULB), Luc Sels (KU Leuven), Françoise Smets (UCLouvain), Rik Van de Walle (UGent), Bernard Vanheusden (UHasselt).