|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Serving in the European Parliament for more than two decades, MEP Antonio López-Istúriz White has stood out in his advocacy and leadership against antisemitism across the continent and his solidarity and friendship with the Jewish people and state.
In an interview with the Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) Executive Director of European Affairs Shannon Seban this week, MEP López-Istúriz White urged European authorities to confront all forms of modern-day antisemitism wherever it comes from, without ideological distinction or double standards. He also discussed the situation in his native Spain and reflected on the meaning of “Never Again” in the ongoing October 7th aftermath.
As MEP López-Istúriz White’s sees it, safeguarding and nurturing Jewish life is a test of Europe’s commitment to broader democratic values.
You have been a Member of the European Parliament for more than twenty years. Have you ever seen antisemitism reach the level we are witnessing in Europe today?
No, not during my time in the European Parliament. Antisemitism has never disappeared from Europe, but what we are witnessing today is different in its scale, visibility, and degree of normalization.
The terrorist atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7th should have produced unequivocal solidarity with the victims. Instead, we saw demonstrations openly celebrating or attempting to justify the attacks, including deeply troubling reactions from certain European political figures. This helped inflame a latent antisemitism that surfaced with alarming speed. As Israel announced its response to the attacks, antisemitic incidents continued to rise across Europe. Since then, Jewish schools and synagogues have required increased protection, students have felt unsafe on campuses, and many Jewish Europeans have concealed visible signs of their identity.
The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights found that 96% of Jewish respondents had encountered antisemitism, online or offline, even before October 7th. Subsequent monitoring by Jewish and specialist civil society organizations across the EU documented a dramatic escalation. France’s Jewish Community Protection Service (SPCJ) reported an increase of more than 1,000% after the Hamas attacks. Germany’s Federal Association of Departments for Research and Information on Antisemitism (RIAS) recorded a 320% rise in the daily number of incidents. And the Antisemitism Reporting Center of the Jewish Community of Vienna (IKG) registered a five-fold increase in Austria.
Europe has built strong institutions to remember the Holocaust. But remembrance has little meaning if we fail to protect living Jewish communities. This is not only a threat to Jews. It is a warning about the condition of European democracy itself.
Antisemitism is coming from different ideological extremes today — the far right, the far left, and radical Islamism. Do you think Europe is equally willing to confront antisemitism regardless of where it comes from?
Unfortunately, not always. Europe is generally comfortable identifying the antisemitism of the far right, and rightly so. But parts of our political and cultural establishment are much more reluctant to confront antisemitism when it comes from the radical left or Islamist extremism.
Antisemitism must be condemned according to what it is, not according to the political identity of the person expressing it. The far right may recycle racial conspiracy theories. The radical left may disguise old prejudices as anti-Zionism. And radical Islamists may glorify violence against Jews in religious or political language. The vocabulary differs, but the consequences for Jewish citizens can be the same.
There must be no hierarchy of antisemitism and no ideological exemptions. At the same time, combating Islamist antisemitism must never become an excuse for hostility toward Muslims. Europe must confront every form of hatred consistently, while distinguishing extremists from the communities they claim to represent. Selective indignation weakens our credibility and leaves Jewish citizens exposed.
You have raised the issue of antisemitism directly with the European Commission. Where do you believe the EU is still failing when it comes to protecting Jewish citizens and Jewish life?
The EU’s Strategy on Combating Antisemitism and Fostering Jewish Life was an important achievement, and I strongly supported it. The problem is now the gap between commitments in Brussels and implementation on the ground.
Member states still record antisemitic incidents according to different standards, while a very large proportion of victims never report what has happened to them. Police officers, prosecutors and judges do not always receive adequate training to recognize the antisemitic motivation behind an offense. Online incitement can circulate rapidly, yet removal, investigation and prosecution remain slow and inconsistent.
We also need stable public funding for the security of synagogues, as well as Jewish schools and community centers. Jewish communities should not have to carry alone the financial burden of protecting themselves from threats they did not create.
Finally, fostering Jewish life means more than preventing attacks. Europe must be a place where Jews can live openly and confidently, wearing Jewish symbols, practicing their religion, and participating fully in public life without fear.
We are seeing Jewish students targeted on campuses, Jewish businesses boycotted, and Jewish citizens sometimes held responsible for the actions of the Israeli government. How concerned are you about this normalization of collective blame against Jews in Europe?
I am profoundly concerned, because collective blame is one of the oldest mechanisms of antisemitism. Holding a Jewish student, shopkeeper, artist or neighbor responsible for the decisions of an Israeli government is irrational and discriminatory.
No French citizen is required to answer personally for every decision taken in Paris, nor is every Spanish citizen treated as a representative of the Spanish government. Yet Jews are increasingly expected to explain, condemn, or distance themselves from Israel before they are allowed to participate in academic, cultural, or political life.
The figures confirm this experience. Three-quarters of Jewish respondents surveyed by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights felt that people in their country held them responsible for the actions of the Israeli government.
Universities have a particular responsibility. They must remain places of debate, including robust debate about Israel and Gaza. But freedom of expression does not include threatening Jewish students, excluding them because of their identity or forcing them to pass a political loyalty test. When that behavior becomes normal, antisemitism has already entered the mainstream.
You have extensive experience working on EU-Israel relations, including five years as Chair of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Israel. Have you seen hostility towards Israel increasingly translate into hostility toward Jews in Europe?
Yes, and the boundary has become dangerously blurred. Criticizing the policies of any Israeli government is legitimate. Israel is a democracy, and Israeli citizens themselves engage in vigorous and often passionate criticism of their leaders.
However, criticism becomes something different when Israel alone is denied the right to exist, when it is portrayed as uniquely evil, when classical antisemitic images are applied to the Jewish state or when Jews everywhere are treated as its agents. Applying standards to Israel that are never applied to any other democratic country should also cause us to examine whether legitimate criticism has become demonization.
Antisemitism and anti-Zionism are not automatically identical, but anti-Zionist language is increasingly used to make antisemitic ideas socially acceptable. The practical test is straightforward. Are we criticizing a government and specific policies? Or are we denying the Jewish people rights that we recognize for other peoples and transferring hostility towards Israel onto Jewish citizens? Too often in Europe today, the latter is taking place.
In demonstrations across Europe, we now hear slogans such as “Globalize the Intifada,” alongside the glorification of Hamas or individuals responsible for terrorist attacks. Should European governments be doing more to prevent the normalization of this rhetoric?
Absolutely. “Globalize the Intifada” is not an abstract appeal for peace. The intifadas included suicide bombings and attacks deliberately targeting civilians. Chanting this slogan in European cities inevitably conveys a threat to Jewish communities living in those cities.
Governments must distinguish between protected political expression — including support for Palestinian rights and strong criticism of Israel — and incitement, intimidation, or the glorification of terrorism. That distinction should be enforced clearly and consistently.
Hamas is an EU-designated terrorist organization. Public authorities must investigate material support, recruitment, and incitement to terrorist violence and the public glorification of terrorist crimes wherever national or European law is breached. Demonstration organizers must also be held accountable when they knowingly permit threats or terrorist symbols.
Democracies should not ban opinions merely because they are offensive. But neither should they use freedom of expression as an excuse for paralysis. Calls for violence do not become harmless because they are chanted by a crowd or presented as political activism.
Turning to Spain specifically, are you concerned about the climate facing Spanish Jews today? And do you believe political rhetoric surrounding Israel and Gaza has contributed to making that climate more difficult?
Yes, I am deeply concerned. Spain’s Jewish community is historically and culturally indispensable to our country. It should never be made to feel that its place in Spanish society is conditional upon events thousands of kilometers away.
The debate about Gaza has become extraordinarily polarized. Many left political leaders have failed to distinguish sufficiently between criticizing the Israeli government, delegitimizing Israel as a country, and creating an atmosphere in which Spanish Jews are treated with suspicion.
The words of governments carry particular weight. When language becomes inflammatory, when Hamas’s crimes are minimized or forgotten, or when Israel is discussed through sweeping accusations rather than based on facts and legal accountability, it creates an excuse for others to go further. And, unfortunately, in Spain, the Spanish government’s partisan use of the Israeli issue is particularly egregious.
This does not mean silencing concern for Palestinian civilians. Their suffering must be recognized, and humanitarian law must be respected. But concern for Palestinians and solidarity with Jewish citizens are not competing moral obligations. A responsible government must defend both without ambiguity.
Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has made Spain one of the most vocal European governments in its criticism of Israel. Without questioning the right to criticize an Israeli government, do you believe some of the rhetoric used in Spain risks fueling the demonization of Israel — and, ultimately, antisemitism?
Yes. As I said before, criticism of the Israeli government, and of any democratically-elected government, is entirely legitimate, but the Spanish government has too often adopted rhetoric that is one-sided, inflammatory and politically calculated. It has frequently emphasized accusations against Israel while devoting insufficient attention to Hamas’s terrorism, the hostages, the use of civilians as human shields and the continuing security threats faced by Israelis.
This imbalance matters. When Israel is portrayed not as a democratic state whose government can be criticized, but as a uniquely illegitimate or criminal presence, the result is demonization rather than constructive diplomacy. That demonization can create an environment in which hostility towards Israel is transferred to Jewish people and institutions.
I am not claiming that every criticism made by Prime Minister Sánchez is antisemitic. That would be inaccurate and would weaken the fight against real antisemitism. My concern is that a prime minister must understand the consequences of his language. Let us remember that he intensified his rhetoric against Israel while efforts were still underway to secure the release of hostages being held by Hamas in inhumane conditions. Spain should always work for the release of the hostages and for a viable political solution, rather than importing the conflict into Spanish society or deepening polarization for domestic political advantage.
As a Spanish MEP and a member of the European People’s Party (EPP), what concrete measures would you like to see at European level — particularly on education, online antisemitism, security and the prosecution of hate crimes?
First, every Member State should fully implement the EU Strategy on Combating Antisemitism and adopt the IHRA working definition as a practical educational and law-enforcement tool, while respecting freedom of expression.
Second, Holocaust education must be strengthened and connected to contemporary antisemitism. Young Europeans should learn not only how the Holocaust occurred, but how conspiracy theories, dehumanization, collective blame, and indifference prepare the ground for persecution. Jewish history should also be taught as part of European history, not only through the history of Jewish suffering.
Third, the Digital Services Act must be enforced rigorously against illegal antisemitic content, terrorist propaganda, and coordinated harassment. Platforms need transparent reporting systems, qualified moderators and rapid cooperation with law enforcement.
Fourth, EU and national funding should guarantee appropriate security for Jewish institutions.
Fifth, EU funding should be conditioned on an education for peace. We cannot keep funding projects in countries where children are educated in schools by teachers or with didactic material that promotes hatred against Jews.
Finally, police, prosecutors, and judges need specialized training, better cross-border cooperation, and comparable systems for recording hate crimes. Laws against antisemitic violence and incitement must lead to investigations and, where the evidence justifies it, effective prosecution.
Europe repeatedly says “Never Again.” But when Jewish Europeans are once again hiding symbols of their identity or questioning whether they have a future here, what does “Never Again” actually mean today — and is Europe living up to that promise?
“Never Again” cannot be merely a phrase pronounced at commemorative ceremonies. It is a commitment to act before hatred becomes persecution, not an apology delivered afterwards.
Today it means that a Jewish child must be able to attend school safely; that a Jewish student can enter a university without intimidation; that a family can go to a synagogue without passing armed guards; and that no European should feel compelled to hide a Star of David or remove a kippah.
Europe is not fully living up to that promise. We have strategies, declarations and remembrance programs, but too many Jewish citizens still feel abandoned when antisemitism comes from politically-inconvenient sources. Our test is not how eloquently we remember Jews who were murdered in the past. It is whether we stand beside Jews who are threatened in the present.
Jewish life is not foreign to Europe. It is an essential part of Europe. If Jewish citizens conclude that they have no future here, Europe will have failed not only them, but its own history, values, and democratic identity.
Read more:
‘Antisemitism Is Anything But Academic. To Fight It, We Need Stories’
