The government came under considerable criticism for the stance it adopted at the EU foreign ministers meeting which discussed the proposal for a review of the bloc’s trade and cooperation relations with Israel over its actions in Gaza.

Foreign minister Constantinos Kombos was one of nine participants to vote against the proposal submitted earlier this month, by the foreign minister of The Netherlands Caspar Weldkamp.

Seventeen foreign ministers, however, voted in favour on Tuesday which meant the EU executive would undertake “a review to establish whether Israel violated its human rights obligations under Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, which defines trade and diplomatic relations between the two sides. Article 2 states that relations shall “be based on of respect for human rights and democratic principles”.

Israel had imposed a humanitarian aid blockade on Gaza since the beginning of March. A limited quantity of desperately needed aid arrived in Gaza earlier this week, but UN officials warned that the supplies allowed in by Israel are nowhere near enough. The Netherlands, a close and firm ally of Israel, considered Israel’s “humanitarian blockade” a “violation of international humanitarian law” and therefore of Article 2. The review of the agreement, which was first proposed by Spain and Ireland 15 months ago, has now gained traction.

In this context, Kombos’ justification for Cyprus’ rejection of the review was very weak, an exercise in obfuscation and deflection. His objections, he said, had been raised “in terms of the procedure and the benefit which would arise from yesterday’s decision, given that at this particular time, we will take into account that any report which emerges will not be from EU personnel who are on the ground”.

Our foreign ministry has always been a stickler for procedure, routinely using it as an excuse not to deal with the substance.

Defending the government’s position, Kombos also said: “Cyprus’ position is that we consider what is happening in terms of the humanitarian situation in Gaza to be tragic and unacceptable … There must be a change in Israel’s attitude and a large flow of aid on a large scale [into Gaza],” he said. So why had the government voted against a proposal aimed at applying pressure on Israel to change its attitude regarding humanitarian aid and lifting its blockade which was the cause of human suffering on an epic scale? It is this type of international pressure, which Kombos and President Nikos Christodoulides are opposed to for procedural reasons, that has forced Israel’s government to allow a number of trucks carrying food into Gaza in the last few days.

Apart from Kombos’ comments, the government has stayed silent on the matter, despite some scathing domestic criticism of its decision, in the hope that it will be forgotten, which it probably will.

It’s stance in the war is firmly by the side of Israel, which was exemplified by Christodoulides’ visit to Israel for a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu, earlier this month. At the time, the government spokesman, responded to criticism of the visit by saying the government was exercising a “multi-faceted, responsible and balanced foreign policy guided solely by the desire to uphold its national interests and enhance its international presence”.

The foreign minister did not attribute his vote on Tuesday to upholding the country’s national interests – it was for procedural reasons – probably because he felt it was extremely difficult to argue such a case. If the Cyprus government’s primary concern was to maintain its very close ties with the Netanyahu government, because it considered that this was the way to best serve its national interests, it could have done this by remaining neutral as Latvia had done. 

Voting against an EU proposal, aimed primarily at pressuring Israel into lifting its humanitarian blockade that put tens of thousands of lives at risk, was not just indefensible, it was wrong. Considering traditional allies of Israel such as France, Austria, Netherlands backed the review of relations with Israel, while a staunch ally like the UK suspended trade talks with Israel over its ‘intolerable’ offensive in Gaza, Cyprus, itself a victim of invasion and occupation, had no moral or political justification for opposing the proposal.

Cyprus will win no brownie points and will not enhance its international presence by acting as Israel’s defender in the EU. Surely, this is not a job for a country constantly calling for respect of international law at all EU platforms.