In early August 2025, Germany made a landmark foreign policy decision: temporarily suspending the approval of arms exports to Israel that could be used in Gaza. This bold move, announced by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, marks a historic detour from Berlin’s decades-long stance as one of Israel’s staunchest allies.
While still affirming Israel’s right to self-defense, Germany emphasized growing humanitarian concerns amid Israel’s intensifying military campaign in Gaza, especially the planned offensive to seize Gaza City. In a dramatic pivot that signals growing unease in Europe over the escalating humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
This article examines the background, implications, domestic and international reactions, economic effects, and future prospects of this pivotal shift in policy. Germany has announced a suspension of arms exports to Israel that could be used in the besieged enclave.
More Read: Trump’s Sweeping Tariffs Take Effect Amid Emerging US Economic Strains
Historical Context: The ‘Special Relationship’
Germany’s relationship with Israel has long been shaped by moral responsibility stemming from the Holocaust. A concept known as Staatsräson—”reason of state”—has underpinned Germany’s commitment to Israel’s security and existence.
This translated into substantial arms exports. Between 2020 and 2024, Germany supplied roughly 30–33% of Israel’s arms imports—making it the second-largest supplier after the United States In 2023 alone, arms exports were estimated at €326.5 million and total export approvals between October 2023 and May 2025 reached €485 million.
The Turning Point: Israel’s Gaza City Plan
The catalyst for Germany’s policy reversal was Israel’s approval—by its Security Cabinet—to launch a full-scale operation to take control of Gaza City, part of its broader strategy to defeat Hamas. This decision sparked intense international backlash and alarm over escalating humanitarian catastrophe.
In response, Chancellor Merz announced that Germany would not authorize any exports of military equipment that could be used in the Gaza Strip “until further notice”, underscoring that the military escalation made it increasingly difficult to see how stated goals—like freeing hostages and disarming Hamas—could be achieved.
Balancing Solidarity and Scrutiny
Merz was careful to reaffirm Germany’s historic solidarity with Israel, rooted in responsibility for the Holocaust. However, he also drew a line: Germany could no longer condone or enable military action that disproportionately endangered civilian lives.
He stressed that Israel retained the right to defend itself, and that the release of hostages, along with determined ceasefire negotiations, remained Berlin’s top priorities. Yet, he warned that the ongoing offensive challenged the feasibility of these goals and demanded greater humanitarian access and restraint.
Domestic Backlash and Political Rift
The decision triggered sharp internal political backlash. Members of Chancellor Merz’s own party (CDU and CSU) criticized the abrupt move, particularly the lack of consultation. Some called it a strategic misstep that risked undermining Germany-Israel relations.
Merz defended his judgment, stating that while not unilateral, the decision was his responsibility to own. He reiterated that solidarity did not equate to unqualified support for all Israeli government actions.
Public Sentiment Shifts
Polling data revealed a marked shift in German public opinion. A majority now supports putting more pressure on Israel over Gaza, and fewer accept the special state responsibility narrative.
Studies show that:
- 66% believe Germany should increase pressure on Israel.
- 62% reject the idea of special responsibility based on Holocaust memory.
This underscores an evolving national sentiment that privileges humanitarian values over traditional symbolic solidarity.
International Context and European Alignment
Germany’s policy shift occurred amid growing European diplomatic criticism of Israel’s Gaza offensive. Bodies like the Council of Europe called on all member states to halt arms deliveries to Israel, while governments across the EU—from Norway to Belgium, the UK, France, and Spain—voiced strong opposition or took similar steps.
International institutions, including the UN and EU leaders, condemned the civilian toll and demanded ceasefire and unrestricted humanitarian access.
Economic and Industrial Impacts: The Case of Renk
The arms embargo may impact domestic defense businesses. Renk—a prominent German defense firm—warned that it might shift production abroad (e.g., to the U.S.) to fulfill existing contracts for Israel, particularly supply of tank gearboxes, which make up 2–3% of its revenue. The policy could reduce Renk’s operating profit by several million euros
Strategic Implications and Future Outlook
Germany’s halt is not an indefinite embargo—it applies specifically to weapons potentially usable in Gaza. Exemptions may remain for systems like missile defense or naval equipment . Ongoing deliveries from pre-approved contracts may continue, subject to review.
Merz also used the announcement to caution Israel against annexing the West Bank—signaling that Berlin’s scrutiny extends beyond the immediate Gaza war.
Germany’s measured approach—balancing historical commitment with humanitarian principles—could influence broader EU policy and potentially strengthen calls for reconsideration of Israel’s special status within the bloc.
Frequently Asked Question
What exactly has Germany halted?
Germany has suspended approval of new arms exports that could be used in the Gaza Strip, stating it will not authorize such exports “until further notice”.
Is this a complete arms embargo?
No. The suspension is partial and specific to hardware potentially usable in Gaza. Other military systems unrelated to the conflict (e.g., missile defense) may still be licensed.
Why did Germany act now?
The decision was triggered by Israel’s Security Cabinet approving a plan to take over Gaza City. Germany cited concerns about mass civilian casualties, forced displacement, and limited humanitarian access.
How does Germany justify this shift despite its historic solidarity with Israel?
Chancellor Merz emphasized that solidarity does not mean unconditional approval of all actions. He reiterated Germany’s commitment to Israel’s security but highlighted the moral imperative to protect civilians and uphold humanitarian law.
What has been the reaction within Germany?
The move drew criticism from the CDU/CSU, citing lack of consultation and potential damage to bilateral ties. Merz defended his responsibility for the decision. Meanwhile, public polls showed growing support for pressuring Israel and reducing the centrality of historic obligation.
Are other countries doing the same?
Yes. The Council of Europe called on member states to halt arms deliveries to Israel. Countries like Norway, Belgium, and the UK also voiced opposition or imposed restrictions. France and Spain signaled deeper diplomatic shifts.
What are the economic implications?
Defense companies like Renk may see revenue impacts or be forced to relocate production abroad to honor contracts. German arms companies are monitoring possible declines in defense export profitability
Conclusion
Germany’s decision to halt arms exports to Israel amid the ongoing Gaza conflict marks a historic and morally charged turning point in its foreign policy. Balancing its deep-rooted commitment to Israel’s security with an increasing obligation to uphold international humanitarian standards, Berlin has signaled that solidarity does not mean silence in the face of mounting civilian casualties and escalating military operations.