By Hans-Christian Hetzer, Berlin
A cultural pub in Germany’s capital: It regularly hosts evening events, including critical lectures on topics such as Islamism and anti-Semitism. In times when both phenomena are increasingly prevalent, such a platform should be appreciated. However, this positioning clearly enrages certain individuals. Long before October 7, 2023, there were repeated threatening incidents. The venue was often defaced with Palestine slogans and red triangles, a symbol borrowed from the Islamist group Hamas to denote “legitimate” targets. These acts did not go without consequences; in September alone, the owners reported three attacks. They recently revealed that during the last incident, on the night of September 27, an attempt was made to set fire to the pub, which is located on the ground floor of a residential building. Social media documentation of the nocturnal attack includes English-language tributes to the Qassam Brigades—the Islamist militia central to the events of October 7—praise for “resistance,” and declarations of support for Hamas in Arabic. Similar patterns have been observed in neighboring countries: just this week, anti-Semitic slogans were spray-painted on a building facade in Vienna housing the offices of the Austrian-Israeli Society.
Behind these actions lies a curious coalition. Some statements are signed by “Palestinian communities,” while others adopt a leftist guise reminiscent of the K-Groups from the 1970s. At the same time, Islamic influences can be observed, such as the display of prayer times at protest camps. Many slogans chanted at demonstrations or sprayed on walls are in English, aiming less to agitate local communities than to embrace the globalism of platforms like TikTok.
This diffuse constellation aligns with historical developments. The original anti-Zionist movement has long lost its initial proponents. It was a product of Stalinism interwoven with elements of anti-Semitism, migrating under the banner of “anti-imperialist liberation struggle” into Pan-Arab nationalism and the New Left. Today, the conflict primarily involves Israel and Islamist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which Iran uses to solidify its regional influence. Nevertheless, the old slogans and imagery persist. While Hamas and Hezbollah proudly present themselves in videos as modern, well-equipped fighters, and Yemeni Islamists fire rockets at Israel from over 2,000 kilometers away, the propaganda of solidarity networks still depicts Palestinian children throwing stones.
The scene becomes even more complex due to overlaps with other milieus. Colorful flags now seen at Middle East demonstrations also appeared at pro-Russia rallies. From there, the step to “Querdenker” (Germany’s anti-lockdown movement) is not far. In Germany and Austria, elements of the “Corona critics” camp had already demonstrated for a “free Palestine” last year. In late September in Berlin, artists from this scene gathered at a “Voices for Gaza” benefit concert. The Democratic Resistance, a central publication for vaccine opponents, refers to “concentration camps” and an Israeli “war of expansion,” framing the events of October 7 merely as “attacks by Palestinian resistance fighters.” Following the World Health Organization’s heavily negotiated polio vaccination campaign in Gaza, the publication seriously criticized the population for being “fully vaccinated.” In this war, any agenda seems to find a place.
The far right, though closely linked to the anti-vaccine movement, remains noticeably restrained. A glance at their publications and debates reveals that their worldview often aligns with that of the demonstrators. However, they know when to hold back. Geopolitically, much of the extreme right leans towards the “Axis of Resistance.” Admiration among various far-right groups for Moscow and Beijing is well-known, but many also look to Tehran and Damascus.
As long as the U.S. does not shift toward isolationism, the far right’s primary concern remains the “alien” influences of the “Atlantists.” Some admire Israel for its uncompromising stance, the growing power of ultranationalist factions, and see them as allies in fighting the perceived expansion of Islam. Yet many, adhering to classic anti-Semitic tropes, view Israel as an instrument of “globalist” manipulation. Far-right media claim that Israel terrorizes its neighbors and manipulates migration flows into Europe to destroy Western culture. Islamist and anti-imperialist narratives about the Holocaust often align with these far-right views. However, unlike their counterparts, far-right groups prefer to discuss these topics internally. The more overtly Muslim anti-Semitism is criticized, the more their own brand of anti-Semitism recedes from view.
This development plays into the far right’s hands. They know that each angry protest, physical assault, and anti-Semitic slogan from Muslim and leftist circles receives more attention than a parliamentary crisis in Thuringia. Haven’t they always warned that multicultural society would end in chaos? Haven’t they long cautioned—drawing inspiration from French debates on “Islamo-leftism”—against a leftist alliance with Islamists? This message now outweighs their own perspective on the Middle East conflict, rendering their alignment with anti-Israel positions largely irrelevant. The situation is extremely advantageous; they simply need to wait, as their agenda advances on its own.
