I understand why the EU doesn’t have leverage - too many cooks. I understand why Germany might want to maintain a low diplomatic profile.
What I don’t understand is how military and economic power translate automatically into diplomatic responsibility.
Why? Because nobody is seriously saying that the US should bomb either the Israelis or the Palestinians. Ditto for economic sanctions. Now, I suppose the US could lower its aid to Israel. But I doubt that would happen, frankly. And a contribution totaling to 1%? of GDP doesn’t allow you to just dictate. So the US, in practice, isn’t going to MAKE anybody do anything.
Yet the participants in the conflict say, “The US should push the Arafat/Sharon to do XYZ.” Ok. XYZ may be in the US’s interest. If so however, it’s probably in the Netherlands’ interest as well. The fact that the latter have fewer bombs and exports is borderline irrelevant.
A better example might be Denmark. Their WWII experience might give them credibility in Israel and their general humanitarian stance might give them negotiating credibility with the Palestinians. But for some reason, the US is suppose to play the role of the mediator. (Heck, shouldn’t a mediator be a disinterested party anyway?)