Far‑right parties across Europe increasingly present themselves as defenders of Israel and the Jewish people despite long histories of antisemitism — and they often do so while vehemently criticizing Muslim communities.

The pivot from antisemitism to what many observers describe as overt Islamophobia was on display at the European Parliament in September when Herbert Kickl — leader of an Austrian party founded in the 1950s by a former Nazi SS officer — acknowledged the Holocaust and embraced Israel’s preferred definition of antisemitism.

Kickl devoted much of his 30‑minute speech to inveighing against followers of Islam seeking to influence Europe’s political systems. And although he added that he was making no blanket judgment about Muslims, it was hard to ignore the dissonance of nearly apologizing for the Holocaust while simultaneously casting another religious minority as a source of Europe’s problems.

Kickl’s approach can only sharpen concerns among critics that he praises Jews chiefly as symbolic allies against other outgroups, particularly Muslims, and that he admires Israel mainly because he views it as an ethnically defined state. In reality, Arab citizens of Israel make up roughly a fifth of the population — and could even help decide the outcome of upcoming elections.

Hafes has written extensively about the shift by formerly openly antisemitic parties like Kickl’s to Islamophobia as a strategy for gaining mainstream acceptance. The shift has been accompanied by forms of philosemitism — a professed admiration for Jews that can become problematic when exaggerated, not least because antisemitism itself often relies on stereotypes that can be repurposed and weaponized. Listen to the interview here

In this conversation, Farid offers a sharp analysis of Herbert Kickl’s strategic positioning, what it signals for the broader European far right, and whether dangerously bigoted political actors truly change their spots.