Countries in the European Union (EU) do not agree. They are arguing about trade rules for goods from illegal Israeli settlements.

歐盟國家之間未達成共識。他們正在就非法以色列定居點產品的貿易規則進行爭論。

Belgium wants strong rules. Belgium says the EU must stop buying these goods. They want to use a vote to make this happen quickly.

比利時希望採取強硬規則。比利時表示歐盟必須停止購買這些貨品。他們希望透過投票來快速實現這一目標。

Germany does not agree. Germany says these rules are a bad idea. They want to keep talking to Israel to stop the war in Lebanon and help people in Gaza.

德國並不認同。德國認為這些規則並非良策。他們希望繼續與以色列對話，以停止黎巴嫩戰爭並援助加薩人民。

Many other EU countries agree with Belgium. About 20 countries want to find a way to stop the settlements.

許多其他歐盟國家支持比利時。約有 20 個國家希望找到停止定居點的方法。

The EU is split. Some want to use trade rules and some want to use talking.

歐盟內部出現分歧。部分國家傾向使用貿易規則，而部分則傾向於對話。

The European Union is currently facing internal diplomatic tension regarding how to handle trade measures against goods produced in illegal Israeli settlements.

歐盟目前在如何處理針對以色列非法定居點生產商品的貿易措施方面，面臨內部外交緊張局勢。

There is a significant disagreement between Belgium and Germany over whether economic pressure is effective or legal. Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prevot argued that the European Commission's recent proposals—such as stricter export licenses and higher tariffs—are too weak and only symbolic. Belgium believes that using trade regulations would allow the EU to pass these measures through a qualified majority vote, which avoids the need for every single member state to agree. This position follows a July opinion from the International Court of Justice, which stated that the occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal.

比利時與德國在經濟壓力是否有效或合法這一點上，存在重大分歧。比利時外交部長 Maxime Prevot 主張歐盟委員會最近的建議——例如更嚴格的出口許可和更高的關稅——太過薄弱，僅具象徵意義。比利時認為利用貿易法規將允許歐盟透過「合格多數票」通過這些措施，從而避免需要每個成員國全部同意。這一立場是基於國際法院在七月發表的意見，該意見指出佔領巴勒斯坦領土是非法的。

On the other hand, Germany claims that trade restrictions would be counterproductive because they could damage diplomatic relations with the Israeli government. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul emphasized that although settlement policies break international law, it is more important to maintain direct dialogue to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon and improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Furthermore, Berlin disagrees with Belgium's legal view, asserting that the Commission's proposals still require unanimous agreement from all 27 member states. However, Germany may be becoming isolated, as around 20 EU nations have asked the Commission for ways to respond to the expansion of settlements.

另一方面，德國聲稱貿易限制將適得其反，因為可能會損害與以色列政府的外交關係。外交部長 Johann Wadephul 強調，雖然定居點政策違反國際法，但維持直接對話以實現黎巴嫩停火並改善加沙的人道主義情況更為重要。此外，柏林不同意比利時的法律觀點，主張委員會的建議仍需 27 個成員國一致同意。然而，德國可能正變得孤立，因為約 20 個歐盟國家已要求委員會尋找應對定居點擴張的方法。

The EU remains split between using trade-based pressure or continuing bilateral diplomacy to address the issue of Israeli settlements.

歐盟在使用貿易壓力或繼續採用雙邊外交來處理以色列定居點問題上，依然處於分裂狀態。

The European Union is currently experiencing internal diplomatic friction concerning the implementation of trade measures against goods originating from illegal Israeli settlements.

歐盟目前在執行針對非法以色列定居點商品的貿易措施時，內部出現了外交摩擦。

The current impasse is characterized by a fundamental disagreement between Belgium and Germany regarding the efficacy and legality of economic leverage. Foreign Minister Maxime Prevot has characterized the European Commission's recent proposals—which include the tightening of export licenses, the imposition of higher tariffs, and potential import prohibitions—as insufficient and symbolic. Belgium posits that the utilization of trade regulations would facilitate the adoption of measures via qualified majority voting, thereby circumventing the requirement for unanimity associated with formal sanctions. This position is informed by the International Court of Justice's July advisory opinion, which designated the occupation of Palestinian territories as illegal and mandated the evacuation of settlements.

目前的僵局在於比利時與德國對於經濟槓桿的成效與合法性存在根本分歧。外交部長 Maxime Prevot 將歐盟委員會近期的建議——包括收緊出口許可、徵收更高關稅以及潛在的進口禁令——描述為不足且僅具象徵意義。比利時主張，利用貿易法規將有助於透過「合格多數決」採納措施，從而避開正式制裁所需的一致同意要求。此立場是基於國際法院七月的諮詢意見，該意見認定佔領巴勒斯坦領土為非法，並要求撤出定居點。

Conversely, Germany maintains that the pursuit of trade restrictions would be counterproductive, potentially compromising diplomatic channels with the Israeli government. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul asserts that while settlement policy remains inconsistent with international law, the prioritization of a ceasefire in Lebanon and the amelioration of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza necessitates the maintenance of direct bilateral dialogue. Furthermore, Berlin disputes the Belgian legal interpretation, contending that the European Commission's proposals would require unanimous consent from all 27 member states. Despite this opposition, reports indicate a growing isolation of the German position, as approximately 20 EU nations have previously sought clarification from the Commission on viable responses to settlement expansion.

相反地，德國認為採取貿易限制將適得其反，可能損害與以色列政府的外交渠道。外交部長 Johann Wadephul 主張，雖然定居點政策與國際法不符，但優先考慮在黎巴嫩達成停火並改善加沙的人道危機，使得維持直接雙邊對話變得必要。此外，柏林質疑比利時的法律解釋，認為歐盟委員會的建議需要 27 個成員國全部一致同意。儘管有此反對，報告指出德國的立場日益孤立，因為先前約有 20 個歐盟國家曾向委員會就如何應對定居點擴張尋求明確答覆。

The EU remains divided on whether to employ trade-based pressure or bilateral diplomacy to address the legality of Israeli settlements.

歐盟在應對以色列定居點合法性問題上，仍對於應使用貿易壓力或雙邊外交存在分歧。