The antisemitic attacks across Europe just keep coming. The incidents are becoming so commonplace now as to not even compel mention when there are fortunately no fatalities or injuries. But at PJ Media, we believe they deserve to be reported.
Arson seems to be the hot terror trend this year, as evidenced just this month: a Jewish-owned Israeli restaurant was vandalized in Munich on April 10. The perpetrators threw pyrotechnic devices into the restaurant, breaking windows but fortunately not injuring anyone. No arrests have been made. Meanwhile, there was an arson attempt on a London synagogue on April 15. The suspects, who were arrested later that day, threw bricks at firebombs they had placed next to a window.
At the annual European Jewish Association (EJA) in Brussels this week, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola warned that such attacks are “assault on everything Europe stands for.” She continued: “Synagogues attacked. Schools targeted. Ambulances set on fire. Jewish families afraid to walk the streets. These are not isolated incidents.”
Yet as European governments are forced to deploy the military, drones, and police to try to keep Jews safe on their streets, many in Europe are more worried about “expansive” definitions of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred. That tendency, as PJ Media readers well know, is especially evident in organizations or individuals with “human rights” in their titles, like Commissioner for Human Rights Michael O’Flaherty of the European Council.
O'Flaherty issued a report this week claiming that Germany has been too strict and "expansive" in determining what constitutes antisemitism. The report states, “Freedom of expression has faced disproportionate restrictions, particularly in debates about Palestinian rights and legitimate criticism of the Israeli government.” That could have been written by any Ivy League college president who is more concerned about their Muslim students’ rights to support genocidal terror groups and intimidate Jewish students than about ensuring Jewish students can safely walk across campus.
The Jerusalem Post reports that "O'Flaherty recommended that authorities refrain from blanket prohibitions of slogans, symbols, or other forms of expression in support of the Palestinian people." You know, like genocidal chants such as “from the river to the sea” and flags of genocidal terrorist groups like Hamas that we see on those Ivy League campuses.
It should be remembered that Berlin alone saw a record 2,267 antisemitic crimes in 2025. Remarkably, that report shows that Berlin police only recorded 381 antisemitic incidents in 2022. Of course, that was the year before the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, which led Israel to wage war against the perpetrators of October 7 and their enablers in Iran, and we know antisemites do not like seeing Jews defend themselves.
And what specific type of antisemite is most responsible for the incredible rise in antisemitic crimes?
The Times of Israel reports, "Antisemitic offenses categorized as motivated by foreign ideologies, related to the Middle East conflict, rose to 1,484, up from 24 in 2022. Crimes motivated by religious ideologies climbed to 348, compared to six in 2022." That’s why the German government responded to O’Flaherty’s report this week with data from a recent MOTRA study showing that antisemitic attitudes are significantly more common among Muslims.
Remarkably, that study found that almost half of Muslims in Germany under the age of 40 hold Islamist beliefs. It's reassuring to know that in its response to O'Flaherty, the German government displayed moral clarity, stating that "freedom of assembly expressions are allowed and possible as long as they do not violate criminal law, do not call for violence, hate, or incitement, or, in this context, challenge in any form Israel’s right to exist."
Related: A Primer on What Genocide Is — and Isn't
Meanwhile, in France and Italy, two other countries where Jews feel increasingly unsafe, lawmakers are voting this week on new laws defining antisemitism. Reuters, another supporter of "human rights" as long as they're not Israeli, dutifully reports that the usual suspects are worried that these laws "could be used to censor criticism of Israel and chill protest movements."
No, the real problem is that anti-Zionism is the new antisemitism, and too many in the West are unwilling to affirm that.
Editor’s Note: PJ Media's loyal subscribers help us bring content like this to the public by supporting us in a media and online environment hostile to what we stand for. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member