Europe Between Human Rights Advocacy and War Partnership

Iran: Multilayered Pressure and Strategic Risks

In recent months, the European Union has adopted new resolutions against Iran, calling for an expansion of “targeted sanctions” while also imposing certain flight restrictions and aviation advisories. This approach comes as European officials continue to assert their commitment to freedom of expression and civil liberties—claims that have themselves faced scrutiny in light of reports by international organizations examining the state of free speech within parts of Europe.

The pattern suggests that Europe is employing a strategy of “multilayered pressure” toward Iran—a combination of economic sanctions, political leverage, and media framing. Yet this strategy contains an inherent contradiction: escalating pressure may not only threaten regional stability but also expose Europe’s own economic and security interests to risk. Past experiences indicate that maximum containment policies tend to deepen mistrust and widen geopolitical rifts rather than produce meaningful behavioral change.

Gaza: The Gap Between Rhetoric and Reality

At the discursive level, Europe emphasizes the need to halt settlement expansion and uphold Palestinian rights. In practice, however, its policies are widely viewed as aligned with the continuation of military and political support for Israel.

The passage of flights carrying Israeli officials through the airspace of certain European states that are parties to the Rome Statute has raised serious questions about these countries’ practical adherence to international legal commitments.

Critical positions taken by figures within the United Nations system, including the UN Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, have been met with sharp reactions from some European governments. This dynamic suggests that, in addressing the Gaza crisis, Europe appears more entangled in political and alliance considerations than focused on a coherent crisis-containment strategy.

The continuation of this duality risks widening the gap between European public opinion and government policies. Meanwhile, polling across the Arab world indicates broad opposition to normalization with Israel—an element that further challenges the regional legitimacy of Europe’s stance.

Ukraine: Collective Security or Prolonging the War?

In the Ukraine crisis, Europe has played an active role in financing and arming Kyiv, coordinating closely with NATO. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has stated that the majority of military assistance has been provided by alliance members.

This level of engagement has positioned Europe as one of the principal actors in sustaining the conflict. Although European officials frame their actions within the doctrine of collective security, the continuation of military aid—while diplomatic pathways remain under discussion—raises a critical question: is Europe, perhaps unintentionally, entrenching a prolonged war of attrition?

Such a trajectory places mounting pressure on Europe’s financial and social resources while simultaneously increasing the risk of a broader confrontation—one that could further endanger the continent’s energy security and economic stability.

Europe and the Crisis of International Legitimacy

Taken together, Europe’s policies toward Iran, Gaza, and Ukraine portray an international actor grappling with a growing legitimacy deficit. The juxtaposition of human rights advocacy with extensive sanctions regimes and military support has created a visible gap between rhetoric and practice. Particularly across the Global South and among non-aligned states, this gap has contributed to the erosion of Europe’s normative standing.

Unless recalibrated, this trend could see Europe shift from a self-styled “soft power” to a largely instrumental player in hard geopolitical equations—a transformation that would not only affect global security, but also the future of the multilateral order itself.