(Oct. 6, 2026 / JNS)
U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have like-minded views on a wide range of topics, including the rather dim view each has of the European Union and its Brussels-based institutions.
Indeed, the relationship both the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government have with the E.U. and its affiliated institutions can be charitably described as “strained.”
Double dim views
In his previous term in office, Trump described the European Union “as a foe,” established “to hurt the United States on trade.” He reiterated the charge at a 2025 Cabinet meeting but in somewhat “earthier” terms, declaring: “The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That’s the purpose of it, and they’ve done a good job of it.”
In July this year, Trump took strong steps to transition from sentiment to action, launching an immediate Section 301 investigation against the E.U., accusing the bloc of “robbing” American companies by inappropriately imposing antitrust penalties on them.
The friction between the two powers edged up a notch when Trump issued an additional trade warning, threatening “very serious tariffs” or a complete halt in trade on certain items over an E.U. proposal to make Canada its first “associate member.” Trump sternly condemned the proposal as a “hostile economic act” against the U.S., asserting: “I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe on many things.”
Netanyahu views the major European Union institutions as inherently hostile and hypocritical toward Israel. Indeed, he publicly denounced the E.U.’s foreign policy as “absolutely crazy,” arguing that the E.U. is the only international body that conditions economic, security and technology relations on political concessions regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Moreover, he often rebukes Brussels for what he terms a “deep moral weakness” and a strategy of appeasement toward radical Islamic terrorism and antisemitic political pressures. Netanyahu routinely accuses E.U. institutions in Brussels of applying double standards against Israel while ignoring grave human rights violations by other adversarial regimes in the Middle East.
Qatargate in Brussels
Clearly, neither is likely to “shed a tear” over events that undermine the standing of the E.U. and its associated institutions.
It is thus pertinent to note that over the last few decades, E.U. institutions have been rocked by several high-profile scandals involving bribery, foreign influence and internal mismanagement that have damaged the E.U.’s international reputation.
One of the most damaging corruption scandals in the European Parliament’s history, dubbed the Qatargate affair, erupted in 2022 and exposed alleged illicit foreign lobbying at the highest levels of E.U. governance. Belgian authorities alleged that the governments of Qatar and Morocco used large cash bribes and luxury gifts to sway E.U. policies, quash critical resolutions on human rights and push for visa-free travel privileges.
The legal proceedings are still ongoing, but some individuals, including a member of the European Parliament (MEP) and a senior European Parliament employee, have already admitted guilt. Moreover, at least 10 individuals have been formally charged in Belgium with corruption, money laundering and participation in a criminal organization, including five serving or former MEPs. Investigations are still ongoing, with an additional high-ranking E.U. official arrested in July 2026.
Chinagate in Brussels?
Another scandal strongly reminiscent of Qatargate involves Chinese tech giant Huawei and accusations that it ran a covert bribery and lobbying operation within the European Parliament. Referred to as “Huaweigate,” it has spurred a major cash-for-influence investigation by Belgian authorities centered on allegations that the corporation sought to circumvent restrictions on its access to Europe’s 5G infrastructure market. The restrictions were based on concerns among Western intelligence services that allowing an adversarial power a central role in a vital segment of Europe’s communications system constituted an unacceptable risk.
So, while Qatargate was about a foreign government allegedly buying favorable treatment, Huaweigate involves allegations of foreign influence concerning critical communications infrastructure.
But the procession of E.U. malfeasance and financial shenanigans did not end with these two scandals. Quite the opposite. The political landscape is peppered with examples of alleged misconduct by senior E.U. officials, incumbent and former. For example, a major procurement fraud and corruption investigation resulted in the brief detention of high-level E.U. officials who remain suspects in the case. Likewise, a former European justice commissioner was formally charged last October with money laundering, with legal proceedings still ongoing.
Pot calling the kettle black?
While Brussels often sets high anti-corruption benchmarks for member states, these serious recent events have damaged the E.U.’s reputation and exposed major system-wide vulnerabilities within the European Parliament and European Commission—ironically, in the very areas where the E.U. claims particular authority: the rule of law, transparency, anti-corruption and resistance to foreign interference.
The most serious problem is one of credibility and perceived hypocrisy, since the E.U. routinely conditions aid, trade privileges and accession progress on governance, judicial independence and anti-corruption standards. The scandals have implicated high-ranking E.U. officials accused or convicted of accepting benefits in exchange for influence from foreign governments, while revealing weaknesses in E.U. safeguards against foreign influence and undermining confidence in Europe’s anti-corruption system.
For both Trump and Netanyahu, these are probably positive developments, as they will almost certainly diminish the stature and moral authority of an entity they perceive as largely adversarial and uncooperative with policies they are striving to advance.