Belgian authorities have blocked a shipment of military components originating in the United Kingdom and destined for Israel, intervening at Liège Airport in what officials say was an enforcement of existing arms transfer rules.
The shipment, which arrived at the airport on March, 24, was stopped before it could continue on to Israel. Belgian officials acted after concerns were raised about whether the transfer complied with regional export and transit regulations governing military equipment. Reporting on the incident indicates the cargo included components tied to military aircraft systems, prompting closer inspection by authorities
The shipment allegedly included components associated with fire control systems and military aircraft, including parts linked to F-35 fighter jet systems and manufactured by Moog, a US-based defense contractor with production facilities in the United Kingdom. Those components fall under controlled categories such as ML5 (targeting and fire control systems) and ML10 (aircraft and related equipment) in the U.K.’s Strategic Export Control Lists.
Legal Basis for the Seizure
Belgium’s decision to halt the shipment rests on its regulatory framework governing the transit of military goods through its territory. Under Belgian law, including the Law of 5 August 1991 on arms transfers and regional decrees such as the Flemish Arms Trade Decree, military goods require authorization not only for export but also for transit. This includes cases where weapons merely pass through ports or airports. In practice, this means that even shipments moving from one foreign country to another must obtain a transit license, particularly where there is a risk that the equipment could be used in violation of international law.
Regional authorities in Wallonia, which oversees arms licensing for Liège Airport, have emphasized that any transfer of military equipment must comply with both regional law and international obligations. According to reporting, officials concluded that the shipment did not meet those requirements, leading to its seizure. Another official stated: “No transit license request was issued; if it had been, it would have been refused.”
Belgium has tightened its approach to arms transfers involving Israel in recent years, particularly following legal challenges and political pressure tied to the genocide in Gaza.
Tension Between Transit and Export Controls
The incident highlights a growing legal and political tension in Europe over whether countries should allow their infrastructure to be used as transit points for military equipment destined for conflict zones.
Even when weapons are manufactured and licensed in another country, in this case, the United Kingdom, transit states like Belgium can impose their own legal requirements. If those requirements are not met, authorities have the power to detain or block shipments.
This creates a layered regulatory environment in which companies and governments must comply not only with export laws in the country of origin but also with transit regulations in any country the shipment passes through.
Broader European Scrutiny of Arms Transfers
Belgium’s action comes amid broader scrutiny across Europe of arms transfers to Israel. Since the escalation of the Gaza genocide, several governments have reviewed or restricted military exports based on concerns about compliance with international humanitarian law.
For example, in February 2024, a Dutch appeals court ordered the government to halt both the export and transit of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel, concluding there was a “clear risk” the components could be used in serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
Similarly, Spain took significant steps in 2024 to restrict military transfers linked to Israel. In Spain, Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares said in January 2024 that Spain had authorized no new arms sales to Israel since October 7, 2023, and in May 2024, Spain denied port access to the Marianne Danica, a Danish-flagged ship sailing from India and carrying arms bound for Israel. Albares said the government would treat that case as a precedent and deny Spanish ports to other vessels transporting weapons to Israel, turning a policy of suspended sales into a broader transit restriction.
These actions reflect a shift in how some governments interpret their obligations under international law, particularly regarding the potential use of exported weapons in ongoing conflicts.
What Happens Next
Belgian authorities have indicated that the seized shipment remains under review, and further legal or administrative action could follow depending on the outcome of the investigation.
The case may also prompt either closer coordination or conflict between European states and allies such as the United Kingdom, which continues to license certain military exports under its own regulatory framework.
For now, the seizure underscores the increasing willingness of transit countries to assert control over arms flows, even when they originate elsewhere. As legal standards tighten and political pressure grows, similar interventions could become more common, reshaping how military equipment moves across borders in times of conflict.
