Belgian Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Marc Botenga has accused the European Union of applying “selective” standards in its condemnation of human rights abuses, arguing that violations are often overlooked when committed by Western allies.
Botenga made the remarks on Thursday during a plenary session of the European Parliament focused on the use of the death penalty in Iran. While stating his opposition to capital punishment in all circumstances, the lawmaker criticized what he described as an imbalance in the EU’s approach to global human rights issues.
Addressing fellow lawmakers, Botenga said that while the EU was debating executions in Iran, civilians—including children—were reportedly being killed in ongoing conflicts in regions such as Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. He argued that these incidents do not receive the same level of attention or condemnation within European institutions.
“Children in Iran, Lebanon and Palestine are being killed or found barely alive under the rubble of their homes every day, yet their lives, their deaths do not deserve a clear condemnation,” he said during the session.
He attributed what he described as this disparity to political alliances, claiming that abuses are less likely to be criticized when linked to countries considered allies of the EU, including Israel and the United States.
“And why? Because the perpetrators are your friends in Tel Aviv and Washington,” Botenga added, in remarks that drew attention within the chamber.
The Belgian lawmaker also questioned the timing and focus of the parliamentary debate, noting that it coincided with reports of legislative developments in Israel concerning the treatment of Palestinian prisoners. He argued that the EU appeared to prioritize criticism of Iran while failing to address other controversial actions elsewhere.
“Even more striking is the fact that on the very day Israel passed a law allowing the execution by hanging of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, you only have time for a debate about the death penalty in Iran,” he said, asking colleagues: “Why this selectivity?”
Botenga emphasized that his position was consistent in opposing the death penalty regardless of where it is practiced. However, he warned that failing to apply standards uniformly undermines the credibility of the EU’s human rights advocacy.
Beyond the issue of capital punishment, the MEP broadened his criticism to include what he described as inconsistencies in the EU’s foreign policy. He argued that the bloc strongly condemns certain actions by geopolitical rivals while maintaining close relationships with allies accused of similar conduct.
He cited the EU’s stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as an example, contrasting it with what he described as support for U.S. military actions in Iran and continued engagement with Israel despite longstanding disputes over territorial issues.
“We criticize our adversaries for what we allow our allies to do, and then we go and shake hands, all smiles, in Tel Aviv and Washington,” he said.
Botenga warned that such perceived double standards could have broader consequences for global stability. According to him, inconsistent responses to international conflicts and human rights concerns risk fueling tensions and eroding trust in international institutions.
He concluded by describing the EU’s current approach as damaging, arguing that it not only weakens its moral authority but may also contribute to ongoing global instability.
“This Europe is not a force for good but an accomplice to crime,” Botenga said.
The remarks come amid heightened global tensions and ongoing debates within the EU over its role in international conflicts, human rights advocacy, and diplomatic relations. While Botenga’s views reflect those of a segment of lawmakers critical of EU foreign policy, officials within the bloc have consistently maintained that their positions are guided by international law and the defense of democratic values.
The European Parliament continues to serve as a platform for diverse and often sharply differing perspectives on global issues, with debates such as Thursday’s highlighting the complexities and challenges of forming a unified foreign policy among member states.
