A disturbing pattern of repression is emerging in Europe

In November, after Israeli football fans rioted and clashed with local residents in Amsterdam, the Dutch political elite almost unanimously sided with the Israeli fans. This injustice is not only reflected in the distorted narrative chosen by Dutch politicians.

These clashes provided a convenient excuse for the ruling Dutch right-wing coalition to introduce a series of measures that are clearly targeting the country’s Muslim population. These proposals, likely prepared long in advance, include stripping dual nationals of their passports and revoking the temporary residency permits of immigrants deemed “anti-Semitic.” It is important to note that in today's political climate, almost any criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza, which some consider genocidal, is labeled as anti-Semitism or terrorism.

Other measures include prohibiting so-called anti-Semitic organizations from receiving public funds, designating them as 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 establishment of a “task force to combat anti-Semitism.” Whether and when the other measures will be implemented remains to be seen.

For those who have been closely following Germany’s actions over the past 15 months, the Dutch government’s rhetoric and actions may sound familiar. For over a year, the German government has not only gone to great lengths to support Israel, but has also criminalized and scapegoated its Muslim, refugee, and immigrant populations. In doing so, it has set a precedent that other European countries are now following.

In June, the German parliament passed a new citizenship law that mandates an “anti-Semitism check” for applicants and prohibits granting citizenship to anyone deemed “anti-Semitic” or disloyal to Germany’s unconditional support for the state of Israel. This standard relies on the problematic International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition, which conflates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.

Liking posts on social media with slogans such as “From the river to the sea” or accusing Israel of murdering children can be enough for an applicant to be denied citizenship. Dual nationals may also not be safe—German law allows authorities to revoke citizenship up to 10 years after it was granted, although the threshold for doing so remains high and largely untested.

In October, German lawmakers also approved new immigration policies that allow the state to revoke the refugee status of individuals deemed to hold “anti-Semitic” views. In November, the German parliament passed a resolution targeting individuals and groups critical of Israel. Those deemed “anti-Semitic” according to the IHRA definition or found to support the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement will be excluded from any public funding programs, even if their work is entirely unrelated to Palestine.

The resolution also calls for “using repressive options” against those deemed “anti-Semitic” and using “criminal, residency, asylum, and nationality law.” While the resolution is non-binding and cannot be legally challenged, it is likely to have a chilling effect on civil society, which is highly dependent on government funding, and normalize the violation of asylum seekers’ and immigrants’ rights. As Nadia Samour, a senior legal advisor at the European Legal Support Center, warned, the resolution “will consolidate the use of migration law as a form of persecution.”

Less than two weeks after the resolution was voted on, a German foundation cited it in its decision to revoke an architecture award granted to an artist who had signed a letter condemning Israel. The threat of “repressive measures” is not new to German groups and organizations concerned with Palestinian solidarity. Since October 7, 2023, they have faced mass repression, police violence, and surveillance, with their bank accounts frozen, demonstrations and events canceled, or, like Samidoun, banned outright.

Human rights organizations have already raised the alarm about Germany’s authoritarian trajectory. They warn that freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, artistic freedom, and academic freedom are being violated. In [a statement](https://www.amnesty.de/aktuell/deutschland-antisemitismus-resolution-gefaehrdet-grundrechte), leading civil society organizations stated that the resolution contributes to “serious violations of fundamental human rights and considerable legal uncertainty.”

In asylum policies, we have already witnessed how a country's most damaging anti-immigrant measures have gone from initial criticism, to normalization, and finally, adoption by other countries. A similar pattern is emerging as the Netherlands appears to be following Germany down the path of authoritarianism in suppressing dissent against Israel. And it is not an isolated case.

In December, France passed a bill that, if approved by the Senate, would deny citizenship, naturalization, or residency to foreigners convicted of discriminatory acts based on race, religion, or nationality. This follows a draft law proposed in October that would make “apology for terrorism,” denying the existence of Israel, and equating Jews or Israel with the Holocaust illegal.

In what is [being described](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/14/whats-in-the-uks-new-definition-of-extremism) as an attempt to suppress pro-Palestinian activists, the UK introduced a new [definition of extremism](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/14/whats-in-the-uks-new-definition-of-extremism) last March, which prevents “extremist” groups from receiving government funding and meeting with officials.

What is concerning is the lack of strong public reaction to these authoritarian tendencies. In the Netherlands, public outrage has focused on racist remarks made by Dutch officials following the violence. There was some pushback in late November when the Dutch parliament accepted a motion requiring the government to collect data on the “norms and values” of Dutch citizens with a migration background. This data was supposed to “gain insight into [their] cultural integration” and help “address problems in a targeted manner.” After outrage on social media about this blatantly discriminatory proposal, the Dutch Prime Minister promised not to act on the motion.

However, there has been no larger mobilization to protest and prevent the implementation of any other repressive measures. The situation is similar in other parts of Europe. Europeans must understand that defending freedom of expression is not just about Palestinians and those expressing solidarity with them. European history is filled with examples of the repression of one group expanding to include others.

We must demand that our governments protect people’s rights to publicly oppose Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza, and Europe’s complicity in it. Ignoring this issue will allow authoritarianism to spread unchecked in Europe.