© Canva
1
,Table of contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Dilemma .................................................................................................................................................. 6
NL.................................................................................................................................................... 6
Israel ................................................................................................................................................ 6
Opponents........................................................................................................................................ 7
Synthesis and Solutions ........................................................................................................................... 8
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 10
2
, Executive Summary
The termination of Dutch F-35 exports to Israel by the Hague Court of Appeal, instigated by lawsuits
from Dutch non-governmental organisations (NGOs) Oxfam Novib, PAX, and The Rights Forum,
underscores a pivotal moment in the discourse on military exports to conflict zones (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024; Derix, 2024). This decision, rooted in allegations of Israel’s international
humanitarian law breaches in Gaza (Kuhn & Hoffberger-Pippan, 2024; Martin, 2024), highlighted by
reports of extensive civilian casualties and the use of F-35s in combat operations, brings to the front the
complex interplay between national security interests and the ethical obligations underpinned by
international law (Amnesty International [AI], 2024a; Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024).
This case compels the Netherlands to re-evaluate its military export policies, particularly in light of the
Arms Trade Treaty and the European Union’s (EU) Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024) which is domestically enforced (Trittenbach et al., 2024), to ensure a balance between
strategic interests and the imperatives of preventing conflict and upholding global norms (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024). The analysis delves into perspectives from the Netherlands, Israel, and critics,
proposing multifaceted solutions to address the underlying legal, ethical, and security dilemmas.
Firstly, the Netherlands’ role as a significant EU arms exporter to Israel, framed by the NL009 regulation
(Broek, 2023; Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024; Trittenbach et al., 2024), underscores the strategic
importance of these military exports in the broader context of (supra)national and global defense
cooperations (BZ, 2024; PAX, 2023; Stop Wapenhandel, 2016). However, this engagement is challenged
by criticisms of Israel’s military actions in Gaza (United Nations [UN], 2024) prompting the Dutch
government to consider the implications of its military partnership on international legal obligations and
human rights standards (PAX, 2023; Stop Wapenhandel, 2016). The government’s decision to appeal
the CA’s ruling also highlights the difficulties in monitoring the end-use of military exports for
international humanitarian law compliance, questioning the adaptability of current arms trade
regulations to changing geopolitical dynamics (Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024; Trittenbach et al., 2024)
Secondly, Israel’s defense strategy, characterised by the use of F35s for self-defense and
counterterrorism (Gupta & Sheikh, 2023; Grudo, 2017; Hurrell, 2005; Shklarsky, 2017; UN Office for
Disarmament Affairs [UNODA], 2013; Zwanenburg et al., 2023) against Hamas (Beehner, 2006;
Medina & Enoch, 2023), is scrutinised against the backdrop of international humanitarian law principles,
raising questions about the proportionality and necessity of military actions that result in civilian harms
(Dworkin, 2023; IDF Editorial Team, 2022; Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2009; Henckaerts et al.,
2012; Mavronicola, 2021; Medina & Enoch, 2023; PAX, 2023; Trittenbach et al., 2024).
Thirdly, meanwhile, the position of the Dutch NGOs, advocating for a cessation of arms exports to
prevent exacerbating the conflict and potential war crime involvements (Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights [OHCHR], 2023) reflects a broader call for compliance with
3
1
,Table of contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Dilemma .................................................................................................................................................. 6
NL.................................................................................................................................................... 6
Israel ................................................................................................................................................ 6
Opponents........................................................................................................................................ 7
Synthesis and Solutions ........................................................................................................................... 8
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 10
2
, Executive Summary
The termination of Dutch F-35 exports to Israel by the Hague Court of Appeal, instigated by lawsuits
from Dutch non-governmental organisations (NGOs) Oxfam Novib, PAX, and The Rights Forum,
underscores a pivotal moment in the discourse on military exports to conflict zones (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024; Derix, 2024). This decision, rooted in allegations of Israel’s international
humanitarian law breaches in Gaza (Kuhn & Hoffberger-Pippan, 2024; Martin, 2024), highlighted by
reports of extensive civilian casualties and the use of F-35s in combat operations, brings to the front the
complex interplay between national security interests and the ethical obligations underpinned by
international law (Amnesty International [AI], 2024a; Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024).
This case compels the Netherlands to re-evaluate its military export policies, particularly in light of the
Arms Trade Treaty and the European Union’s (EU) Common Position 2008/944/CFSP (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024) which is domestically enforced (Trittenbach et al., 2024), to ensure a balance between
strategic interests and the imperatives of preventing conflict and upholding global norms (Castellanos-
Jankiewicz, 2024). The analysis delves into perspectives from the Netherlands, Israel, and critics,
proposing multifaceted solutions to address the underlying legal, ethical, and security dilemmas.
Firstly, the Netherlands’ role as a significant EU arms exporter to Israel, framed by the NL009 regulation
(Broek, 2023; Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024; Trittenbach et al., 2024), underscores the strategic
importance of these military exports in the broader context of (supra)national and global defense
cooperations (BZ, 2024; PAX, 2023; Stop Wapenhandel, 2016). However, this engagement is challenged
by criticisms of Israel’s military actions in Gaza (United Nations [UN], 2024) prompting the Dutch
government to consider the implications of its military partnership on international legal obligations and
human rights standards (PAX, 2023; Stop Wapenhandel, 2016). The government’s decision to appeal
the CA’s ruling also highlights the difficulties in monitoring the end-use of military exports for
international humanitarian law compliance, questioning the adaptability of current arms trade
regulations to changing geopolitical dynamics (Castellanos-Jankiewicz, 2024; Trittenbach et al., 2024)
Secondly, Israel’s defense strategy, characterised by the use of F35s for self-defense and
counterterrorism (Gupta & Sheikh, 2023; Grudo, 2017; Hurrell, 2005; Shklarsky, 2017; UN Office for
Disarmament Affairs [UNODA], 2013; Zwanenburg et al., 2023) against Hamas (Beehner, 2006;
Medina & Enoch, 2023), is scrutinised against the backdrop of international humanitarian law principles,
raising questions about the proportionality and necessity of military actions that result in civilian harms
(Dworkin, 2023; IDF Editorial Team, 2022; Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2009; Henckaerts et al.,
2012; Mavronicola, 2021; Medina & Enoch, 2023; PAX, 2023; Trittenbach et al., 2024).
Thirdly, meanwhile, the position of the Dutch NGOs, advocating for a cessation of arms exports to
prevent exacerbating the conflict and potential war crime involvements (Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights [OHCHR], 2023) reflects a broader call for compliance with
3
