In November, the Dutch political elite overwhelmingly sided with Israeli soccer fans after they went on a rampage in Amsterdam and provoked violence against local residents. The injustice did not stop at the twisted narrative that Dutch politicians chose to adopt.
The clashes have given the ruling Dutch right-wing coalition a convenient pretext to introduce a series of measures that clearly target the country’s Muslim community. These proposals – which they had undoubtedly held for a long time – included depriving dual nationals of their passports and migrants of their temporary residence permit if they are considered “anti-Semitic” – with the reservation that in the current political climate, almost all statements criticizing the Israeli genocide in Gaza are characterized as anti-Semitic or terrorist.
Other measures include banning public funding of so-called anti-Semitic organizations, labeling them terrorist entities and placing them on sanctions lists, banning the Palestinian prisoner support network Samidoun, and criminalizing the “glorification of terrorism”.
So far, the government has only implemented one of these proposals: the creation of a “working group for the fight against anti-Semitism”. It remains to be seen if and when the others will be put into practice.
For anyone who has closely followed what Germany has done over the past 15 months, the rhetoric and actions of the Dutch government may seem familiar. For over a year now, the German government has done everything possible to not only support Israel, but also to criminalize and scapegoat its Muslim, refugee and immigrant communities. In doing so, he set a precedent that other European countries are now following.
In June, the German parliament passed a new citizenship law that imposes an “anti-Semitism check” for applicants and excludes the granting of citizenship to anyone considered “anti-Semitic” or not committed to the reason of State of Germany for its unconditional support for the Israeli state. The criteria are based on the problematic IHRA definition which confuses anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.
Liking a social media post with slogans like “From the river to the sea” or a post accusing Israel of child murder could be enough for applicants to be denied citizenship. Dual citizenship may not be safe either: German law allows authorities to revoke citizenship up to 10 years after it was granted, although the threshold for this remains high and largely untested.
In October, German lawmakers also approved new immigration policies, allowing the state to revoke the refugee status of people deemed to engage in “anti-Semitism.”
In November, the German parliament passed a resolution targeting individuals and groups critical of Israel. Those who are considered “anti-Semitic” according to the IHRA definition or who support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement must be excluded from any public funding initiatives – even if their work has nothing to do with Palestine .
The resolution also calls for “resorting to repressive options” and using “criminal law, the right of residence, asylum and nationality” against those perceived as “anti-Semitic”.
Although the resolution is not binding, it also cannot be legally challenged and will likely have a considerable chilling effect on a civil society heavily dependent on government funding and normalize the encroachment on the rights of asylum seekers and migrants . As Nadija Samour, senior legal advisor at the European Legal Support Center, warns, the resolution “will cement the use of immigration law as a form of persecution.”
Less than two weeks after the resolution was passed, a German foundation referenced it in its decision to cancel an architecture prize awarded to an artist who signed a letter condemning Israel.
The threat of “repressive measures” is not new for groups and organizations that focus on Palestinian solidarity in Germany. Since October 7, 2023, they have suffered massive repression, violence and police surveillance, seen their bank accounts frozen and demonstrations and events canceled, or even banned altogether, like Samidoun.
Rights groups have sounded the alarm about Germany’s authoritarian trajectory. They warned that freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, artistic freedom and academic freedoms were being violated. In a statement, leading civil society organizations called the resolution enabling “serious violations of fundamental and human rights and considerable legal uncertainty.”
When it comes to asylum policy, we have seen how one country’s most devastating anti-immigration measures are first criticized, then normalized, and finally adopted by others. A similar pattern appears to be developing with the crackdown on anti-Israel protests, as the Netherlands appears to follow Germany’s slide toward authoritarianism. And he is not alone in this.
In December, France passed a bill that, if approved by the Senate, would deny citizenship, naturalization or residency to foreigners found guilty of discriminatory acts based on race, religion or origin national. This follows an October bill that would make it illegal to “advocate terrorism,” deny the existence of Israel, and compare Jews or Israel to the Holocaust.
In what has been called an attempt to silence pro-Palestinian activists, the UK introduced a new definition of extremism in March last year that prevents “extremist” groups from receiving government funding and to meet officials.
It is worrying that there has not been enough public backlash against these authoritarian tendencies. In the Netherlands, public outrage focused on racist remarks made by Dutch authorities in the aftermath of the violence.
There was some reluctance when, at the end of November, the Dutch parliament accepted a motion asking the government to collect data on the “norms and values” of Dutch citizens with immigrant backgrounds. This data was supposed to “provide insight into (their) cultural integration” and help “solve problems in a targeted manner.” Following outrage on social media over this clearly discriminatory proposal, the Dutch Prime Minister promised not to act on the motion.
But there was no larger-scale mobilization to protest against the other repressive measures and prevent their implementation. This is also the case elsewhere in Europe.
Europeans must understand that the defense of freedom of expression does not only concern Palestinians and those who express solidarity with them. European history is full of examples where repression targeting one group extends to others as well.
We must demand that our governments protect the rights of citizens to speak out and take action against the Israeli genocide in Gaza, as well as European complicity in this genocide. Ignoring this problem would allow authoritarianism to spread unabated in Europe.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Tel Aviv Tribune.
