The EU is one of the biggest supranational organizations in the world, the third-biggest global economy after the US and China. At the start of the 2020s, two major conflicts have commenced in two different areas of the world: in Eastern Europe between Ukraine and Russia and the Middle East between Israel and Gaza. As of this study being written, neither conflict has been resolved and none are looking closer to accomplishing this. Therefore, the purpose of this case study is to analyze the EU’s responses to these two conflicts during the first month of each conflict and how they can be explained. As a theoretical background, the study uses two different types of IR theories: Realism and Constructivism. For an easier analysis, three indicators from each theory have been operationalized, based on key concepts from each theory. The intention is that these theories will help explain and analyze the EU’s responses. The results show that there are different responses from the EU concerning the two different conflicts, which differ more or less depending on which indicator is being studied.

Even though international conflicts often lead to varied responses from state actors, the reasons behind these differences remain underexplored, especially regarding political support for those who are harmed. This study investigates why some states express solidarity with those harmed in armed conflict, focusing on the Israel-Gaza conflict as a case study. I argue that the intensity of civil society advocacy significantly influences state actors’ solidarity behaviour. This argument is structured around a three-step causal mechanism: civil society advocacy raises public awareness, prompting public pressure on state actors, which increases costs of inaction, leading to solidarity expressions. By employing a structured, focused comparison of Spain and Italy, the study qualitatively assesses public solidarity manifestations and civil society advocacy intensity, using protest data and media coverage as indicators. The findings suggest that Spain’s intense civil society advocacy has resulted in significant public pressure and official solidarity displays, whereas Italy’s weaker civil society response led to less solidarity manifestations. These results highlight the crucial role of civil society in shaping state behaviour during conflicts, providing both theoretical and empirical contributions to the study of civic engagement and state’s conflict response.