ByGOL KALEV

JUNE 3, 2026 15:00

Three factions vie for influence across Europe: integrationists, nationalists, and Muslim communities. The first two possess established stories and symbols, whereas the emerging Muslim national movement remains in its formative phase.

Muslims arriving in Europe from diverse backgrounds find common ground partly through self-chosen separation and partly through actions by European societies that push them together, including curbs on religious expression, prejudice, and claims of increasing anti-Muslim incidents.

Both paths toward Muslim group identity are seen as challenges to European cohesion.

Yet what if Europe could foster Muslim unity via a shared stance unrelated to internal affairs: resistance to Israel?

As Europe intensifies its measures against the Jewish state, observers suggest this may be the intent - sidelining the Jewish nation in a bid to preserve European stability.

Europe’s crafting of such a substitute story has succeeded before.

Nation building through conflict versus through harmony

In the mid-1800s, Germany’s architect Otto von Bismarck initially sought to bind scattered German-speaking states via shared cultural elements like songs, emblems, and aspirations.

When that failed, Bismarck turned to an alternative: forging bonds against a mutual foe. He arranged what many historians regard as deliberate conflicts, first with Denmark, then Austria, and finally France.

The approach succeeded, leading to a unified Germany established not on home soil but in France at the Palace of Versailles.

Theodor Herzl, who examined Bismarck’s methods, developed Zionism as a departure from European patterns. He substituted the European emphasis on voluntary conflict with a Zionist focus on strength enabling peace: once secure in their homeland, Jews would contribute to humanity in ways that would make the Jewish state essential to Europe and beyond, he argued.

Today, advancements from Tel Aviv, Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Jerusalem, and other parts of Israel extend lifespans, transform science, and reshape global progress.

Nevertheless, Europe and its allies have invested heavily to obscure these contributions through penalties, warnings of renewed detentions of Jews, restrictions on movement, and widespread campaigns against the Jewish state.

If Bismarck could unify Germans via opposition to France, perhaps Europe now aims to unite its Muslim populations through opposition to Israel.

This possibility gains weight from Europe’s prior successes in shaping identities in the Middle East over the past hundred years.

European efforts to shape identities

In the 1920s, Britain received a League of Nations mandate to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Yet Britain sought the territory for itself and applied classic divide-and-rule strategies used across its empire.

After France dismantled the brief Arab Kingdom of Syria, Britain imposed a new identity on Arabs living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean: Palestinians.

British diplomat Mark Sykes, known for the Sykes-Picot agreement, even created a flag for this purpose.

Arabs in Palestine initially resisted this colonial identity project. Over the following decades, however, European powers nurtured Palestinian nationalism to advance their goals: Britain used it against Jewish interests, Germany leveraged it against Britain before World War II, and in later years the EU and European states employed it against Israel and, by extension, America.

Extending this pattern, the Palestinian nationalism shaped by Europeans in the 20th century now appears directed at channeling Muslim discontent away from Europe and toward the Jewish state.

Furthermore, the Sykes-designed flag now appears in demonstrations across European cities.

Thus, European integrationists possess the EU flag, nationalists have their national flags, and Muslims now have the Palestinian flag.

Here European thinking from 2026 falls short of current conditions: Europe appears to assume it can redirect Muslim discontent toward Israel while still achieving broad integration. It has, for instance, created the Office of Promoting Our European Way of Life.

Neither outcome is materializing, and Europe’s conduct is increasingly viewed as a risk to worldwide stability and American security interests.

Europe’s opportunity: Halt the campaign

Can Europe change course and acknowledge that its actions against the Jewish state ultimately harm rather than help its own interests?

It might achieve this by requesting that US President Donald Trump oversee a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to resolve the long-standing European-Israeli tensions, as proposed in a recent analysis.

Additionally, hope remains that principled Europeans will arise to compel their governments to cease this century’s campaign.

Some suggest this shift is underway, with changes inside European nations and a reorientation from West to East: from Old Europe, which places opposition to Israel above its own continuity, to New Europe, which seeks to gain from the clear advancements originating in Zion.

The writer is the author of the new book From Survival to Peace: Turning the Assault on Judaism around (2026). He is also the author of The Assault on Judaism: The Existential Threat is Coming from the West (2024), and of Judaism 3.0: Judaism’s Transformation to Zionism (2022). He is chairman of the Judaism 3.0 think tank. For his geopolitical analysis, visit EuropeAndJerusalem.com.