Investigate Europe and Reporters United have uncovered that a network of European universities remains financially linked to Israeli companies and research institutes with clear defence connections, despite public statements promising to suspend such collaborations after the International Court of Justice warned of a risk of genocide in Gaza.

The analysis, based on the EU CORDIS project database and a series of freedom‑of‑information requests, identifies 34 institutions in Spain, the Netherlands, Italy and Belgium that are part of 38 Horizon Europe projects involving Israeli entities that either belong to the defence sector or produce technology with dual‑use potential. The projects together attract roughly €15 million in EU research funding.

Legal battle at the University of Granada

One of the most visible cases concerns the University of Granada in southern Spain. In September 2023 the university's rector, Pedro Mercado Pacheco, sent a message to staff and students affirming the campus as a space for dialogue, human‑rights defence and peacebuilding. At the same time, the university moved to suspend collaborations with Israeli partners that were part of multi‑million‑euro EU research consortia.

That decision was challenged by the pro‑Israel advocacy group ACOM (Action and Communication in the Middle East), which sued to block the suspension. The dispute has now reached Spain's Supreme Court, where a ruling is expected next year. The court's verdict could set a precedent for whether Spanish universities may invoke "defence of international law" as a ground for terminating contracts with entities linked to armed conflict.

While the legal fight continues, Granada has simultaneously signed up for a new Horizon Europe project called PROACTIF. The consortium includes the Israeli microchip firm Mellanox, now owned by US giant Nvidia, alongside European defence manufacturers Safran and Leonardo. PROACTIF aims to develop autonomous aerial, ground and surface robots for rapid response to emergencies.

Both the university and the project's coordinators argue that the research is strictly civilian. Francisco Barranco, the professor leading the Granada team, told Investigate Europe that the consortium was "already formally committed" before the academic boycott began and that the technology, while capable of dual‑use, is intended for civilian applications such as disaster relief.

Dual‑use technology and the Israeli defence industry

Dual‑use technology, equipment that can serve both civilian and military purposes, sits at the heart of the controversy. Mellanox's high‑speed interconnects, for example, are used in data centres worldwide but have also been supplied to Israeli Aerospace Industries, whose Heron drones have been deployed over Gaza. Similarly, the Israeli semiconductor firm Weebit Nano, a partner in the Italian NeAIxt project, produces chips that can be adapted for aerospace and defence systems.

Other Israeli partners identified in the investigation include the Technion, Israel's premier institute of technology, and the Holon Institute of Technology. Both have long‑standing links to the Israeli Ministry of Defence and to companies such as Elbit Systems, a major supplier of unmanned aerial vehicles, remote‑controlled bulldozers and cyber‑defence tools used by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF).

In the Netherlands, the University of Groningen announced in October 2025 that it would suspend its participation in the REACT project, which involves the Technion. The decision followed revelations that a Technion professor, Shahar Kvatinsky, served as a reserve lieutenant colonel in the Israeli army and had been photographed in uniform at sites in Gaza and Lebanon. However, two weeks later Groningen reversed the suspension, limiting its involvement to direct researcher‑to‑researcher collaboration while keeping the broader consortium intact.

Eindhoven University of Technology, another Dutch partner, initially pledged to freeze ties with the Technion but later confirmed it would continue with the project, citing contractual obligations and the need to protect ongoing research funding.

European universities' financial calculus

Why do institutions continue to work with Israeli defence‑linked partners when public pressure and ethical guidelines appear to demand otherwise? The answer lies partly in the economics of European research funding.

European universities have faced shrinking state budgets, falling enrolment numbers and increasing competition for limited Horizon Europe grants. Dr Gaetano Salina, a physicist at Italy's National Institute of Nuclear Physics, explains that "consortia have become closed clubs. Once you are inside, you gain access to a steady stream of funding that is hard to replace. Leaving a consortium can mean losing not only the current project but also future eligibility."

Legal experts also warn that unilateral withdrawal from a Horizon Europe project can trigger hefty penalties. The University of Ghent in Belgium estimated that breaking a contract could cost "tens of millions of euros" in fines, repayment of grants and loss of credibility. In March 2026 the university succeeded in exiting a project with an Israeli partner only after finding a replacement partner and securing approval from the majority of consortium members, a process that took months of negotiation.

At the University of Delft, internal emails obtained through freedom‑of‑information requests reveal that administrators debated the risk of "serious legal and financial consequences" if they failed to honour existing commitments. One email warned that "withdrawal could affect the possibilities of obtaining future subsidies" and damage the reputation of individual researchers as reliable partners.

These financial and legal pressures create a paradox: universities publicly condemn Israeli defence collaborations while quietly maintaining them to safeguard research income and avoid contractual breaches.

Scale of Israeli involvement in Horizon Europe

The investigation's data show that Israeli entities are present in 793 of the 19,203 Horizon Europe projects signed up to by May 2026, roughly one in every 24 projects. Of those, about 80 % involve partners with direct links to the Israeli defence sector or state bodies such as the Ministry of Defence.

Across the EU, 386 higher‑education institutions are currently part of 205 projects that include Israeli defence‑linked partners. An additional 12 projects involve Israeli state agencies, with 128 European institutions participating.

In Spain, the University of Granada's PROACTIF project is joined by Mellanox, which the EU database still lists as an Israeli company despite its acquisition by Nvidia. This classification enables the project to receive Horizon funding under Israel's association agreement with the EU.

In Italy, the University of Bologna's supervisory board announced in autumn 2025 that it would halt new collaborations with Israeli entities that have dual‑use potential. Yet documents reveal that the university reversed its stance in December 2025 after a legal analysis concluded that withdrawing would breach Italy's international obligations and expose the university to costly lawsuits. Bologna remains a partner in the NeAIxt project, which includes Weebit Nano, a semiconductor firm that has supplied components to Elbit Systems.

French institutions are not immune. Paris‑Saclay University is involved in six Horizon Europe projects with Israeli partners, five of which started after the October 2023 Gaza conflict. One of these, the STARLight project, develops silicon‑photonic chips that can be used for lidar sensors, technology that has already been reported as part of the IDF's targeting systems. The project also includes French defence contractor Thales.

In February 2026 the university's Council for Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity recommended suspending partnerships with Israeli universities such as Tel Aviv University. The recommendation was later withdrawn after the Ministry of Higher Education argued that a "political stance based on the Middle‑East conflict cannot justify unilateral academic sanctions."

Student and union reactions

Student activists across Europe have staged protests, sit‑ins and petitions demanding that universities sever all ties with Israeli entities linked to the war in Gaza. At the University of Ghent, a student named Jarkko told Investigate Europe, "The legislative texts give us a legal basis to suspend or withdraw if ethical principles are not respected. Why are we still waiting?"

In Spain, the University Network for Palestine, a coalition of professors from public universities, has warned that continued collaboration may label European institutions as "unreliable partners" in future research consortia. Associate professor Maria José Lera of the University of Seville said, "In the end Israel has the money, the project goes ahead, and we are the ones who lose out."

Trade unions have also weighed in. The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) released a statement urging the European Commission to tighten the Horizon Europe eligibility criteria, arguing that "public funds should not be used to advance technologies that can be turned into weapons of war."

European Commission's stance

The European Commission maintains that each Horizon Europe project is assessed individually for compliance with ethical standards, national law and EU regulations. A spokesperson told Investigate Europe, "When implementing projects, all beneficiaries must ensure that all activities comply with ethical principles and relevant national, Union and international law. Notwithstanding the above, it cannot be excluded that the results could be further developed into technologies with dual‑use application."

The commission also highlighted that the Horizon programme includes a "dual‑use" clause, requiring participants to conduct a risk assessment for any technology that could be used for military purposes. However, the clause does not automatically prohibit collaboration with defence‑linked firms; it merely obliges partners to monitor and mitigate potential misuse.

Broader implications for European research policy

The findings raise questions about the coherence of EU research policy with its stated commitment to human rights and peace. If EU funds are supporting projects that can be weaponised, critics argue that the Union is indirectly financing the military capabilities of a state engaged in a conflict that has been labelled by the International Court of Justice as carrying a risk of genocide.

Proponents of the current approach argue that scientific collaboration should remain insulated from geopolitics. The Association of Israeli University Heads (VERA) responded to the investigation, stating that "excluding research partners or boycotting scientists based on their national origin is a direct violation of academic freedom and European anti‑discrimination norms."

Nevertheless, the tension between academic freedom, ethical responsibility and financial necessity is likely to intensify as the EU prepares its next multi‑annual research framework, Horizon Europe 2, slated for 2028. Policy makers will have to decide whether to tighten the definition of "defence‑linked" partners, introduce stricter vetting mechanisms, or allow universities greater discretion to withdraw from controversial collaborations without fearing legal repercussions.

What comes next

The Supreme Court ruling on the University of Granada's suspension case will be closely watched. A decision that upholds the university's right to terminate contracts on the basis of international law could empower other institutions to follow suit without fearing legal backlash.

Meanwhile, the European Commission has signalled that it will review the dual‑use assessment procedures for Horizon Europe projects, though no concrete reforms have been announced.

For now, the €15 million flowing to projects with Israeli defence links remains a point of contention for students, staff, unions and policymakers alike. The balance between securing research funding and upholding ethical standards continues to test the solidarity of Europe's higher‑education sector.