A disturbing pattern of repression is emerging in Europe

After Israeli football fans went on a rampage in Amsterdam and sparked violence against local residents in November, the Dutch political elite overwhelmingly sided with them. The twisted narrative that Dutch politicians chose did not stop injustice.

The conflicted incidents provided a convenient excuse for the ruling Dutch right-wing coalition to propose a number of measures that clearly target the country’s Muslim population. These proposals included removing dual nationals from their passports and removing migrants from their temporary residence permits if they were deemed “anti-Semitic” despite the caveat that, in today’s political climate, almost all statements criticizing Israel’s genocide in Gaza are being labeled as anti-Semitic or terrorist.

Other measures include barring so-called anti-Semitic organisations from public funding, labelling them as terrorist entities, and placing them on sanctions lists, banning the Palestinian prisoner support network Samidoun, and criminalising the “glorification of terrorism”.

The establishment of a “taskforce for the fight against anti-Semitism” is the government’s only prior action to implement one of these proposals. If and when the others are put into practice, it is still up for grabs.

The Dutch government’s rhetoric and actions may come across as familiar to those who have closely followed what Germany has done over the past 15 months. The German government has gone to great lengths to support Israel, as well as to criminalize and scapegoat its Muslim, refugee, and immigrant communities. In doing so, it established a precedent for other European nations to come after.

A new citizenship law mandates an “anti-Semitism check” for applicants and forbids granting citizenship to anyone found to be “anti-Semitic” or not committed to Germany’s d’etat for its unconditional support for the Israeli state, according to a new citizenship law passed in the German parliament in June. The problematic IHRA definition, which conflates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, serves as the basis for the criteria.

Applications for citizenship may be denied for submitting a social media post with the hashtags “From the river to the sea” or “From the sea to the sea” as well. German law allows authorities to revoke citizenship up to ten years after it was granted, but the threshold is still high and largely untested, making dual citizens not safe either.

In October, German lawmakers also approved new immigration policies, allowing the state to revoke the refugee status of individuals who are deemed to espouse “anti-Semitism”.

A resolution that targeted Israel-favorable individuals and groups was passed by the German parliament in November. Anyone who is found to be “anti-Semitic” under the IHRA definition or who supports the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction (BDS) movement is exempt from all public funding initiatives, even if their work is entirely unrelated to Palestine.

The resolution also calls for “utilising repressive options” and using “criminal, residence, asylum and nationality law” against those perceived to be “anti-Semitic”.

The resolution is non-binding, but it can also be challenged legally, which will likely have a significant chilling impact on a civil society that is heavily reliant on government funding, and normalize encroachment on asylum seekers and migrants’ rights. As Nadija Samour, senior legal adviser for the European Legal Support Centre, warns, the resolution “is going to cement the use of migration law as a form of persecution”.

A German foundation referenced the resolution in its decision to revoke an architectural award given to an artist who had signed a letter demonizing Israel less than two weeks after it was approved.

Organizations and groups that promote Palestinian solidarity in Germany are familiar with the threat of “repressive measures.” Since October 7, 2023, they have been facing massive repression, police violence and surveillance, have had their bank accounts frozen and demonstrations and events cancelled, or been outright banned, like Samidoun.

Rights groups have sounded the alarm about Germany’s authoritarian trajectory. They have warned that freedom of opinion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the arts and academic freedoms are being violated. Major civil society organizations criticized the resolution for allowing “serious violations of fundamental and human rights and considerable legal uncertainty,” according to a statement.

In asylum policy, we have witnessed how one country’s most devastating antimigration measures are initially criticised, then normalised, and eventually adopted by others. The Netherlands appears to be following Germany’s descent into authoritarianism as a pattern appears to be forming with the repression of protests against Israel. And it is not the only one.

In December, France passed a bill that, if approved by the Senate, would deny citizenship, naturalisation, or residency to foreigners convicted of discriminatory acts based on race, religion or national origin. This follows a proposed law from October that would make “terrorist apologism”, denying Israel’s existence, and the comparison of Jews or Israel to the Holocaust illegal.

The UK introduced a new extremism definition in March of last year, which prevents “extremist” organizations from meeting with government officials in what has been called an attempt to silence pro-Palestinian activists.

Worryingly, there has not been enough public reaction against these authoritarian tendencies. Racist remarks made by Dutch officials in the wake of the violence sparked public outcry in the Netherlands.

The Dutch parliament issued a request to collect information on the “norms and values” of Dutch citizens with a background in migration, which at the end of November provoked some opposition. These data were supposed to “offer insights into]their] cultural integration” and help “address problems in a targeted manner”. The Dutch prime minister promised not to take action on the motion after the widespread outcry on social media about the blatantly discriminatory proposal.

However, there hasn’t been a larger mobilization to protest or stop the implementation of any other repressive measures. This is the case elsewhere in Europe, as well.

Palestinians and those who show their solidarity with them are also concerned about defending freedom of speech, according to Europeans. There are many instances in European history where repression against one group spreads to include others as well.

We must demand that our governments defend people’s freedoms to speak out and take action against both European complicity in and against Israel’s genocide in Gaza. If the problem was left unresolved, authoritarianism would continue to spread throughout Europe.

Source: Aljazeera