In November, the Dutch political elite overwhelmingly sided with Israeli football fans after they carried out violence in Amsterdam and Provocation Violence with local residents. The injustice did not stop at the twisted narrative that Dutch politicians chose to adopt.

These clashes gave the ruling Dutch right-wing coalition a convenient pretext to introduce a set of measures clearly targeting the country’s Muslim community. These proposals – which had likely been up their sleeves for a long time – included stripping dual nationals of their passports and immigrants of their temporary residence permit if they were deemed “anti-Semitic” – with the caveat that in the current political climate, any statement criticizing Israel’s genocide in Gaza is labeled an anti-Semite or terrorist.

Other measures include banning so-called anti-Semitic organizations from public funding, designating them as terrorist entities, placing them on sanctions lists, banning the Palestinian Prisoners Samedon support network, and criminalizing “glorification of terrorism.”

So far, the government has implemented only one of these proposals – the establishment of a “task force to combat anti-Semitism”. It remains to be seen if and when others will be put into practice.

To anyone who has closely followed what Germany has done over the past 15 months, the Dutch government’s rhetoric and actions may sound familiar. For more than a year, the German government has done its best to not only support Israel, but also to criminalize and scapegoat its Muslim, refugee and immigrant communities. Thus, it set a precedent that other European countries will now follow.

In June, the German parliament passed a new citizenship law that provides for an “anti-Semitism check” for applicants and rules out granting citizenship to anyone deemed “anti-Semitic” or not committed to Germany’s raison d’être for its unconditional support of the Israeli state. The criteria depend on the problem Definition of the International Holocaust Alliance (IHRA). Which confuses anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.

Liking a social media post with slogans such as “From the River to the Sea” or a post accusing Israel of killing children may be enough to deny citizenship to applicants. Dual citizens may not be safe either – German law allows authorities to revoke citizenship up to 10 years after it is granted, although the threshold for doing so remains high and largely untested.

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

In November, the German Parliament passed a resolution targeting individuals and groups critical of Israel. Those who are considered “anti-Semites” under the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition or who are found to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement will be excluded from any public funding initiatives – even if their work is completely unrelated to Palestine.

The resolution also calls for “the use of repressive options” and the use of “criminal law and the law of residence, asylum and nationality” against those perceived as “anti-Semites.”

While the decision is non-binding, it cannot be legally challenged, and is likely to have a massive chilling effect on civil society that relies heavily on government funding and normalizes infringement on the rights of asylum seekers and migrants. As Nadia Sammour, senior legal advisor at the European Legal Support Centre, warned, the decision “will reinforce the use of immigration law as a form of persecution.”

Less than two weeks after voting on the resolution, a German institution referred to it in its decision to cancel the architecture prize awarded to an artist who signed a letter condemning Israel.

The threat of “repressive measures” is nothing new for groups and organizations focused on Palestinian solidarity in Germany. Since October 7, 2023, they have faced widespread repression, violence and police surveillance. Their bank accounts have been frozen and demonstrations and events have been cancelled, or, like Samidoun, banned altogether.

Human rights groups have sounded the alarm about Germany’s authoritarian trajectory. They warned against violating freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of the arts, and academic freedoms. In a statementMajor civil society organizations called for the decision to allow “serious violations of fundamental and human rights and a great deal of legal uncertainty.”

In the area of ​​asylum policy, we have witnessed how the most destructive anti-immigration measures in a country are initially criticized, then normalized, and eventually adopted by other countries. A similar pattern appears to be unfolding now with the crackdown on protests against Israel, as the Netherlands appears to be tracking Germany’s slide toward authoritarianism. And she’s not alone in that.

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 national origin. This follows a proposed law passed in October that would make it illegal to “terrorist apologies,” denying the existence of Israel, and likening Jews or Israel to the Holocaust.

What happened? Named In an attempt to silence pro-Palestinian activists, the UK has introduced a new law Definition of extremism In March last year, it banned “extremist” groups from receiving government funding and meeting with officials.

Worryingly, there has been insufficient public reaction against these authoritarian trends. In the Netherlands, public anger focused on racist statements made by Dutch officials in the wake of the violence.

There was some resistance when the Dutch parliament at the end of November approved 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.” [their] cultural integration” and helping to “address problems in a meaningful way.” Following outrage on social media over the clearly discriminatory proposal, the Dutch Prime Minister promised not to act on the proposal.

But there was no widespread mobilization to protest and halt the implementation of any of the other repressive measures. This is the case elsewhere in Europe as well.

Europeans must understand that defending freedom of expression does not only concern Palestinians and those who express solidarity with them. European history is full of examples in which oppression targeting one group extends to include other groups as well.

We must demand that our governments protect people’s rights to express their opinions and take action against Israel’s genocide in Gaza, as well as European complicity. Ignoring this issue 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 Al Jazeera.