Understanding the Complex Roots of Dutch Support for Israel's Football Hooligans

Recently, Amsterdam witnessed violent clashes involving Israeli football fans, which sparked a heated response from both Dutch officials and international leaders. This event, framed by many Western media outlets as antisemitic attacks against Israeli supporters, highlighted the complex and often contradictory history of Dutch-Israeli relations. The outcry in response to these clashes draws from deep-seated political, historical, and racial issues that extend far beyond football. Here, we’ll unpack the concepts and events at play, exploring the historical context of Dutch support for Israel and its connection to colonial and racial attitudes in the Netherlands.

The Amsterdam Clashes: What Happened?

On November 7, 2024, Israeli football fans visiting Amsterdam to support their team allegedly provoked tensions with racist and inflammatory chants, some celebrating violence against Palestinians. Amidst these provocations, clashes broke out between the fans and local Dutch citizens, including individuals who oppose the ongoing Israeli policies toward Palestinians. The Dutch authorities quickly labeled these incidents as “antisemitic,” igniting reactions from leaders like King Willem-Alexander, who referenced the Netherlands’ dark history during the Holocaust to emphasize the seriousness of the situation.

However, the portrayal of these events as attacks against Jewish people rather than confrontations with specific Israeli actions has raised questions. The framing of the clashes as antisemitic disregarded the specific context of Dutch-Israeli relations and the often-overlooked colonial and racial dynamics that influence Dutch foreign policy.

Why Does the Dutch Government Support Israel So Strongly?

The Netherlands is among Israel’s most unwavering allies in Europe, with a relationship that dates back to the post-World War II era. The country was quick to support Israel’s establishment, partly in response to Europe’s shame and guilt over the Holocaust. This support extended to a steadfast refusal to recognize Palestinian rights for self-determination for decades, even as European neighbors gradually shifted their stance. This policy is rooted in several historical and ideological factors:

1. Colonial Legacy: The Netherlands has a long history as a colonial power, from the Americas to Southeast Asia. The Dutch colonial mindset viewed colonialism as a “civilizing mission,” similar to how some European states viewed Israel’s establishment as a European project in the Middle East. This colonial perspective resonated with the idea of a Jewish state in Palestine as a European “settler colony,” reinforcing Dutch solidarity with Israel.

2. Post-Holocaust Guilt: Following the Holocaust, the Netherlands grappled with its own role in the Nazi occupation, during which 75% of Dutch Jews were killed—a higher percentage than in many other European countries. In the post-war period, Dutch leaders and the public looked for ways to atone, often by supporting Israel as a “haven” for Jews. However, this response frequently ignored the colonial nature of Israel’s establishment and its impact on Palestinians.

3. Pro-Israel Political Culture: Over the decades, Dutch leaders from various political parties embraced a supportive stance toward Israel. This support transcends party lines and reflects an almost fanatical commitment to Israel’s right to defend itself—even in cases of military occupation or other controversial actions.

Dutch Racism and Its Impact on Public Perceptions

Many argue that Dutch support for Israel, particularly in cases like the recent football clashes, reflects broader issues of racism and colonial superiority in Dutch society. The Netherlands has historically exhibited a strong bias against Arabs and Muslims, rooted in its colonial past and modern-day anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiments. These biases help explain why Dutch authorities may be more sympathetic to Israeli supporters, even if those supporters engage in aggressive or provocative behavior.

Historical Stereotyping of Arabs and Muslims:

Dutch media and literature have often stereotyped Arabs and Muslims, portraying them as violent or culturally inferior. This long-standing prejudice persists, shaping public opinion and government policy.

Anti-Palestinian Sentiment: The Netherlands has consistently shown an antagonistic stance toward Palestinian rights. Unlike other European nations, the Dutch government has actively opposed Palestinian self-determination and has been quick to align with Israeli perspectives, even when these contradict international norms.

The Double Standards in Responding to Violence:

The quick condemnation of the Amsterdam clashes as “antisemitic” by Dutch and Western leaders is seen by many as hypocritical, especially given the alleged provocations by Israeli fans and the Dutch government’s history of supporting Israel even when Israeli actions are widely criticized internationally. This response raises questions about double standards in Dutch and Western reactions to violence involving Israelis versus other groups.

For instance, despite evidence that some Israeli fans shouted racist and violent slogans, Dutch officials were quicker to condemn their citizens as antisemitic rather than acknowledging the complex nature of the altercation. By framing any criticism or confrontation involving Israeli individuals as antisemitic, officials obscure the broader context of Palestinian rights and reinforce a narrative that protects pro-Israel actions from scrutiny.

The Call for Reflection on Dutch Foreign Policy

The situation reveals an urgent need to reevaluate Dutch foreign policy, especially regarding its alignment with Israel and the failure to address racial bias and colonial attitudes in the country’s domestic and international policies. A balanced and fair approach would require acknowledging the legacy of Dutch colonialism, confronting ongoing racism toward Arabs and Muslims, and reassessing the nation’s unconditional support for Israel.

The Netherlands, with its colonial history and legacy of racial prejudice, faces a critical opportunity to examine how these elements shape its modern political stances. By recognizing and addressing these biases, Dutch leaders could foster a more equitable policy that acknowledges the rights of all communities, rather than favoring one group over another based on historical guilt or political alliances.

In sum, the recent events in Amsterdam should be understood not simply as an issue of antisemitism but as a reflection of a broader historical and cultural context. Only by addressing these underlying issues can the Netherlands hope to build a more just and balanced foreign policy.