More than 800 officials in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union released a public letter of dissent on Friday against their governments’ support of Israel in its war in Gaza.
The letter is the first instance of officials in allied nations across the Atlantic coming together to openly criticize their governments over the war, say current and former officials who are organizing or supporting the effort.
The officials say that it is their duty as civil servants to help improve policy and to work in their nations’ interests, and that they are speaking up because they believe their governments need to change direction on the war. The signers say they have raised concerns through internal channels but have been ignored.
“Our governments’ current policies weaken their moral standing and undermine their ability to stand up for freedom, justice and human rights globally,” the letter says, according to a copy obtained Thursday by The New York Times. It adds that “there is a plausible risk that our governments’ policies are contributing to grave violations of international humanitarian law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide.”
The Israeli military launched a bombing and ground campaign in Gaza after Hamas fighters invaded Israel on Oct. 7 and killed about 1,200 people while abducting about 240, Israeli officials said. More than 27,000 people in Gaza have been killed and nearly 2 million have been displaced since Israel’s offensive began, according to the health ministry in Gaza and United Nations officials.
The document does not include the names of signers because they fear reprisal, said one organizer, an official who has worked in the State Department for more than two decades. But about 800 current officials have given approval to the letter as it has quietly circulated among employees at the national level in multiple countries, the official said.
The effort reveals the extent to which pro-Israel policies among American, British and European leaders have stirred dissent among civil servants, including many who carry out the foreign policies of their governments.
About 80 of the signers are from American agencies, with the biggest group being from the State Department, one organizer said. The governing authority most represented among the signers is the collective European Union institutions, followed by the Netherlands and the United States.
National-level officials from eight other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, as well as Sweden and Switzerland, have approved the letter, said another person familiar with the letter. Most of those supporters work in the foreign ministries of those nations.
“The political decision-making of Western governments and institutions” over the war “has created unprecedented tensions with the expertise and duty that apolitical civil servants bring to bear,” said Josh Paul, who worked in the State Department bureau that oversees arms transfers but who resigned in October over the Biden administration’s support of Israel’s military campaign. Mr. Paul said he knew the organizers of the letter.
“One-sided support for Israel’s atrocities in Gaza, and a blindness to Palestinian humanity, is both a moral failure and, for the harm it does to Western interests around the globe, a policy failure,” he said.
U.S. officials released a few similar letters and dissenting messages last fall. In November, more than 500 employees of about 40 U.S. government agencies sent a letter to President Biden criticizing his policies on the war. In that letter, the officials also did not reveal their names.
More than 1,000 employees of the United States Agency for International Development released an open letter along the same lines. And dozens of State Department officials have sent at least three internal dissent cables to Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken.
Across the Atlantic, dissent among European officials has also broken through in the months since Israel’s military response in Gaza after the Oct. 7 attack.
In the European Union, which maintains a joint diplomatic corps known as the European External Action Service, as well as agencies dealing with humanitarian aid and development, hundreds of officials have signed at least two separate letters of dissent to the bloc’s leadership. Unlike the United States, the E.U. does not maintain “dissent channels” for officials to formally register their disagreement with policy.
The 27 E.U. countries, and their joint institutions, have taken diverging stances on the war, but the majority of governments are largely pro-Israel.
Only a handful of E.U. nations — prominently Ireland, Spain and Belgium — have consistently called on their partners and the E.U. to moderate support for Israel, push for a cease-fire, and focus on Gazans’ suffering.
One of the signatories to the joint letter, Berber van der Woude, a former Dutch diplomat, said she had agreed to put her name down in part to support active civil servants who feared retribution for dissenting.
Ms. van der Woude, a conflict and peacekeeping expert who had served in the Dutch Foreign Ministry, including its mission in Ramallah, in the West Bank, resigned in 2022 in protest to her government’s policy. She has since been a prominent pro-Palestinian voice in the Netherlands.
She said that she had been deeply demoralized by the fact Dutch policy toward the Israel Palestinians was tightly controlled by a very small number of top officials, and that trend had been amplified after the Oct. 7 attacks.
“The fact that you can’t talk about it makes it frustrating because the policy choices and the actions of the Dutch ministry are harmful for the situation in the Middle East, but they also have a huge spillover effect on the international rule of law,” she said.
Dutch diplomats, she added, are reared in a strong tradition of upholding international law, because of the Netherlands’ unique role as the home of high-profile institutions like the International Criminal Court.
Ms. van der Woude said that dissent in situations like the Israel-Hamas conflict, even among the ranks of civil servants who tend to work behind the scenes and take political direction from elected governments, was justified if the policies being adopted were seen as harmful.
“Being a civil servant doesn’t absolve you from your responsibility to keep on thinking,” she said. “When the system produces perverse decisions or actions, we have a responsibility to stop it. It’s not as simple as ‘shut up and do what you’re told’; we’re also paid to think.”
