By: Fern Sidman

Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced on Friday that Germany will suspend the authorization of any military equipment exports that could be used in Gaza “until further notice,” a move that The New York Times described in a report on Friday as one of the most significant breaks in Germany’s postwar policy toward Israel.

The decision comes against the backdrop of deepening divisions within Merz’s center-left coalition and mounting international scrutiny over humanitarian conditions in Gaza. While German officials emphasized that the suspension is not expected to critically impair Israel’s military capabilities in the territory, The New York Times report noted that the step carries substantial symbolic weight, given Germany’s long-standing commitment to Israel’s security as a core principle of state policy rooted in the historical legacy of the Holocaust.

According to the information provided in The New York Times report, internal debates in Berlin over recent weeks had centered on credible reports of widespread malnutrition and even starvation among Gaza’s civilian population. The tipping point came early Friday when the Israeli cabinet approved an escalation of military operations in the Strip rather than pursuing a cease-fire and negotiations for the release of hostages still held by Hamas.

In a formal statement, Chancellor Merz said, “The even harsher military action by the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip, approved by the Israeli cabinet last night, makes it increasingly difficult for the German government to see how these goals will be achieved. Under these circumstances, the German government will not authorize any exports of military equipment that could be used in the Gaza Strip until further notice.”

Merz stressed, as Germany has in previous declarations, that Israel retains the right to defend itself against Hamas’s attacks and that Hamas must play no role in Gaza’s future governance. He emphasized that the release of Israeli hostages and the achievement of a cease-fire remain top priorities for Berlin. However, The New York Times reported that the chancellor also issued a pointed reminder that Israel bears a direct obligation to safeguard the nutrition and health of Gaza’s civilian population.

“Having decided on a further offensive in an already devastated Gaza,” Merz said, “the Israeli government bears even greater responsibility than before for providing for their needs.” He also reiterated Germany’s opposition to any annexation of further territory in the Judea and Samaria region.

Germany is the second-largest supplier of military equipment to Israel after the United States, providing roughly one-third of Israel’s imports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). Figures cited by The New York Times show that from October 7, 2023 — the date of Hamas’s large-scale attack on Israel — through May 13, 2025, Germany approved export licenses for military goods worth €485 million (about $564 million).

These deliveries included firearms, ammunition, weapons parts, specialized equipment for the army and navy, electronic systems, and armored vehicles. However, SIPRI’s data indicate that the bulk of Germany’s arms exports to Israel are frigates and torpedoes — systems with limited relevance to operations in Gaza.

It remains unclear which specific items will now be withheld, but The New York Times report suggested that the suspension will encompass any export licenses for weapons or components that could be deployed in the Gaza theater.

The New York Times report noted that the suspension represents a rare moment in which Germany’s historical commitment to Israel’s security has come into direct tension with its contemporary political and humanitarian priorities. While Merz’s coalition partners on the center-left have pressed for stronger public criticism of Israel’s Gaza campaign, the chancellor has sought to balance such calls with the strategic imperative of maintaining close bilateral ties.

Given Berlin’s role as a leading European Union member state, the move is expected to resonate beyond Germany’s borders. Diplomats told The New York Times that other European countries could view the decision as a precedent for recalibrating their own arms export policies toward Israel, especially amid growing concern about the civilian toll in Gaza.

Since the end of World War II, Germany has made the survival of Israel a cornerstone of its foreign policy, viewing it as a moral obligation in light of the Holocaust. As The New York Times report observed, this foundational principle has translated into consistent political, economic, and military support for Israel across successive German governments.

The suspension of arms exports that could be used in Gaza, therefore, marks a sharp — albeit potentially temporary — deviation from that policy. While Berlin has made clear that the measure does not signal a withdrawal of its broader commitment to Israel’s security, the move nonetheless underscores the increasing difficulty of reconciling historical responsibilities with current geopolitical realities.

The Merz government has not specified a timeline for reviewing the suspension, saying only that the halt will remain “until further notice.” The New York Times reported that any reconsideration will likely depend on developments in Gaza, including whether Israel adjusts its military strategy, pursues cease-fire negotiations, or takes more visible steps to address humanitarian needs.

In the meantime, Germany will continue to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza and maintain its security cooperation with Israel in areas unrelated to the ongoing conflict. Officials in Berlin emphasized that the measure is intended to apply narrowly to military exports potentially usable in the Gaza theater, not to the full spectrum of defense cooperation between the two countries.

As The New York Times report indicated, while the practical impact of the suspension may be limited in military terms, its political and diplomatic significance is considerable — signaling a shift in Germany’s posture that will be closely watched both in Europe and the Middle East.