Key facts
- Spain has become a vocal critic of Israel's actions in Gaza, with Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez pushing for measures like suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement.
- Spain formally recalled its ambassador and announced a halt to arms sales to Israel in October 2023.
- Despite the announcement, military imports from Israel continued, amounting to €36.7 million ($41.9 million) under specific HS codes by February 2025.
- A law imposing an arms embargo against Israel and prohibiting imports from occupied Palestinian territories was approved on September 23, 2025.
- Legal experts note that pre-existing contracts, explicit exceptions, and loopholes weaken the practical enforcement of the embargo.
- An exception was made three months after the law's passage, allowing the transfer of defense material for aeronautical projects, citing industrial and export potential.
Spain has emerged as one of the most vocal Western critics of Israel's actions in Gaza, with Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez calling for multilateral measures to end the arms trade with Israel and pushing to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement. Spain is the only EU country to have formally recalled its ambassador and, in October 2023, announced a halt to arms sales to Israel.
However, a report by the Delas Centre for Peace Studies indicated that military imports from Israel persisted after October 2023, amounting to €36.7 million ($41.9 million) by February 2025. This situation shifted on September 23, 2025, when Sanchez approved a law imposing an arms embargo against Israel and prohibiting imports from the occupied Palestinian territories.
Legal experts note that the law's effectiveness is limited by pre-existing contracts, explicit exceptions, and loopholes. Eirene de Prada, a professor of international law, stated that while the government sends a strong symbolic message, it has exploited loopholes in the Royal Decree-Law to continue business with Israel. Royal Decree-Law 10/2025, approved on October 8, 2025, aims to prohibit the transfer of defense and dual-use materials used by Israel against the civilian population.
Despite the law, contracts already granted have not been altered, and exceptions can be made when Spanish authorities deem it justified. For instance, three months after the law's passage, an exception was applied for the transfer of defense material related to four aeronautical projects led by Airbus, citing significant industrial and export potential. This included an anti-missile protection system manufactured by Elbit Systems.
Furthermore, Spain can legally import and export defense equipment via other EU countries and purchase equipment from Israeli companies based within the EU. These transactions, legally defined as acquisitions and sales, are not covered by the current law, even though they constitute a significant amount of Israeli weapons in Spain through subsidiaries or licensed production. Experts suggest that sanctions should target the financial channels to the Israeli war machine, similar to European sanctions on Russia.
The article also contrasts Spain's situation with other countries. Colombia, for example, announced a halt to purchasing Israeli arms and reduced military cooperation in February 2024, but existing contracts, including those for maintaining Kfir fighter jets, are being honored. Colombia has signed a contract with Saab for new fighter jets to replace the Israeli-made Kfirs and is developing a locally made rifle to phase out the Galil. South Africa, while facing legal challenges regarding WTO principles, has been urged by a UN Special Rapporteur to discriminate against Israel, given an ICJ finding obligating nations to end complicity in the illegal occupation of Palestine.
Both Spain and Colombia face the vulnerability of policy reversal under future administrations. Colombia's President-Elect has proposed greater collaboration with Israeli defense industries, and his commitment to expanding mining threatens the durability of Petro's export ban. In contrast, Spain's decree-law has greater formal solidity, but a future administration could still reform or overturn it.