The European Parliament is once again at the heart of a heated debate, this time grappling with a word that carries the weight of history: genocide. As lawmakers in Strasbourg prepare to vote on a resolution regarding the ongoing crisis in Gaza, the question of whether to label Israel’s military campaign as genocide has split the chamber and exposed deep ideological rifts across the continent.
On Tuesday, September 9, 2025, the Parliament’s president Roberta Metsola confirmed that the institution is actively negotiating the language of an upcoming resolution on the Gaza Strip, specifically whether to condemn Israel’s actions as genocide. Metsola told the European Newsroom, “This is something that is being negotiated in the resolution right now.” The resolution, scheduled for a vote on Thursday, calls for EU action to combat famine in Gaza, the release of hostages, and progress towards a two-state solution—a trio of demands reflecting both humanitarian urgency and political complexity.
Why has the word ‘genocide’ become such a flashpoint? The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, established in 1948, defines genocide as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. This includes not only killings, but also causing serious harm, imposing destructive living conditions, preventing births, or abducting children. With such a grave definition, it’s no surprise the term is fiercely debated in the context of the Gaza conflict.
The roots of the current crisis stretch back to October 7, 2023, when Hamas militants launched a devastating attack on southern Israel, killing about 1,200 people and abducting more than 250 hostages. In response, Israel began a military campaign in the Gaza Strip. According to the Hamas-controlled health authority, more than 64,500 Palestinians have since been killed, a toll that includes many women and children. The humanitarian situation has deteriorated sharply, with famine, starvation, and a lack of basic services becoming daily realities for Gaza’s residents.
During a fiery parliamentary debate on Tuesday, titled “Gaza at breaking point: EU action to combat famine, the urgent need to release hostages and move towards a two-state solution,” lawmakers clashed over the use of the word genocide. Spanish socialist MEP Nacho Sánchez Amor urged the EU to “call out evil” and “state that this is a genocide.” On the other side of the spectrum, Antonio Tânger Corrêa of the far-right Patriots for Europe argued that Hamas, recognized as a terrorist organization by the EU, “must be held accountable” and “is an obstacle to peace.”
The debate grew even more heated when Dutch conservative MEP Sander Smit accused Belgian left-wing MEP Marc Botenga of “insulting” victims of other genocides by labeling the Gaza conflict as such. “Where is the proof of genocide?” Smit challenged. “Israel is providing aid, is evacuating children, if you talk about genocide… it’s antisemitism.” Botenga pushed back, citing NGOs like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Doctors Without Borders, and “Israeli genocide scholars” as recognizing genocide in Gaza. “Who are you to deny genocide?” he retorted.
The Parliament’s discussions, while not binding, are far from irrelevant. According to European Newsroom, these resolutions, though lacking direct diplomatic power, exert political pressure on the Israeli government and shape public opinion across the EU. The bloc has already acknowledged that Israel’s actions breach human rights provisions in its Association Agreement with the EU, but has stopped short of imposing sanctions, largely due to resistance from member states keen to maintain relations with Israel.
The controversy isn’t confined to the Parliament’s walls. Last week, European Commissioner Teresa Ribera, the Commission’s Spanish executive vice president, publicly described Israel’s military actions in Gaza as “genocide.” In a speech at Sciences Po, Ribera said, “The genocide in Gaza exposes Europe’s failure to act and speak with one voice even as protests spread across European cities and 14 United Nations Security Council members called for an immediate ceasefire.” Her remarks drew swift condemnation from the Israeli government, which accused her of parroting Hamas, and prompted the European Commission to distance itself from her comments. “It’s not up to the Commission to judge on this question and definition but really for the courts, and there has been no College [of Commissioners] decision on this particular subject,” Commission Chief Spokesperson Paula Pinho clarified at a press conference in Brussels.
President Metsola, meanwhile, stressed the depth of concern among EU citizens and their representatives. “Very clearly we are the number one provider of humanitarian aid and it is clear to everybody that that aid is not arriving. That hostages have not been returned and that we are seeing starvation, hunger and killing on an unprecedented scale,” she told the European Newsroom. Metsola added, “The situation cannot go on, it cannot. Humanity must always remain the number one priority.”
Yet, as the Parliament inches closer to its Thursday vote, the EU’s internal divisions remain on full display. The bloc’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, acknowledged the challenge: “We can’t move as a union until member states share the same view on what to do.” This paralysis, as highlighted by both parliamentary debate and public protests, underscores Europe’s struggle to forge a unified response to one of the most devastating humanitarian crises of the decade.
While the Parliament’s resolution is expected to call for immediate action to alleviate famine, secure the release of hostages, and advance a two-state solution, the question of genocide hangs over the proceedings like a storm cloud. The outcome of Thursday’s vote—and the language ultimately adopted—will likely reverberate far beyond Strasbourg, influencing diplomatic relations, humanitarian policy, and the ongoing debate over Europe’s role in the world.
As the State of the Union debate unfolds and expectations mount, all eyes are on the European Parliament. The words chosen now will shape not only the EU’s stance on Gaza, but also its moral and political legacy in confronting conflict and atrocity.
