In the wake of heightened tensions following the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, the European Union (EU) and other European entities have faced complex challenges in addressing Israel and its actions without conflating the government, its institutions, and its citizens. The European approach to criticism and sanctions has traditionally involved differentiating governments from the people they govern, a practice evident in responses to Iran, Russia, North Korea, and Hezbollah. This nuanced approach has been more difficult to maintain in the case of Israel, a democratic state whose citizens elect their governments, creating distinct dynamics.

European officials have consistently sought to separate the actions of Hamas from those of the Palestinian Authority and the broader Palestinian population. Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief at the time, emphasized the importance of avoiding collective punishment and explicitly stated that not all Palestinians are terrorists. Similarly, Europeans have historically distinguished between the Russian government and ordinary Russians, even as some sanctions and restrictions affected the general population following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Israel, however, presents a different challenge. As a functioning democracy, its elected leaders bear decisions that impact civilians and combatants alike, including military operations in Gaza and the West Bank. This democratic context complicates how European actors assign responsibility and express criticism. Some European critics have extended their scrutiny beyond government policies to Israeli universities, cultural institutions, broadcasters, and sports teams, viewing these as extensions of the Israeli state. This has led to calls for boycotts and exclusions, such as broadcasters withdrawing from events like the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest due to Israel’s participation.

European Council President Antonio Costa’s remarks in September 2025 exemplify the official stance, emphasizing that measures targeting Israel were responses to government actions rather than an indictment of the Israeli people. Nonetheless, outside formal diplomatic channels, distinctions between Israeli state actions and Israeli society often become blurred, with the government and citizens conflated.

The dilemma is partly rooted in democratic accountability. Citizens vote, pay taxes, and serve in the military, linking them to government policies in ways that do not apply to populations under authoritarian regimes. However, this linkage does not translate straightforwardly into collective guilt. Large segments of Israeli society oppose government policies, including widespread protests against judicial reforms and public demonstrations in support of hostages taken during the recent conflict. Additionally, Israel’s Arab minority, composing approximately 20 percent of the population, often stands in opposition to government actions, raising questions about collective responsibility tied to citizenship.

Beyond politics, Israel’s unique position in European consciousness shapes attitudes. Israel’s deep historical, cultural, and political connections to Europe—through its leadership, legal traditions, academic institutions, and shared memory of the Holocaust—make it both familiar and subject to European standards and debates about colonialism, nationalism, and historical responsibility. Some European critics draw parallels between Israel’s policies and European history of colonial rule and territorial domination, framing Israel as a settler-colonial state.

This framing has intensified scrutiny, at times collapsing the distinction between Israel’s state policies, the country itself, and its citizens, with repercussions for Israeli Jews in Europe, who increasingly report feeling collectively held responsible for government actions. A 2023 survey by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights found that 75 percent of Jewish respondents felt they were blamed for Israeli government policies solely on the basis of their Jewish identity.

Observers note that democracy should encourage recognition of internal diversity and dissent, rather than collective attribution of responsibility. Election outcomes reveal competing views within Israeli society, including vigorous opposition movements, indicating that responsibility lies with conduct and decisions rather than with nationality or ethnicity.

Calls for accountability remain central. Israeli institutions and individuals implicated in wrongdoing should be held to account, and criticism of government policies is legitimate. However, decisions concerning cultural exchanges, academic collaborations, and sports participation should be grounded in evidence of complicity or misconduct, not on national identity alone.

The situation also underscores the need for mutual consistency. Just as Europeans seek to separate Israeli citizens from their government’s policies, it is equally important to distinguish between Palestinians as a people and groups like Hamas. Similarly, criticism of Israeli policy should not be conflated with antisemitism or hostility toward Israel as a whole.

Europe’s historical experience in navigating the distinction between governments and populations offers a model for engaging with Israel. Maintaining these distinctions in public discourse and policymaking remains essential to fair and effective responses in an ongoing and highly charged conflict.