Pro-Palestinian protesters gather at Museumplein ahead of a 6 km march through the city as part of a protest demanding a tougher stance from the Dutch government against Israel’s war in Gaza, in Amsterdam, Netherlands, Oct. 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Charlotte Van Campenhout

On Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas demonstrated to the world exactly what its ideology looks like when translated into action.

Israeli families were slaughtered inside their homes, young people attending a music festival were hunted and murdered, women suffered sexual violence, children witnessed unimaginable brutality, and innocent civilians were dragged into Gaza as hostages. Approximately 1,200 people were murdered and 251 abducted.

The evidence was overwhelming, including footage recorded by the terrorists themselves. Yet, instead of universal condemnation, we witnessed something almost as disturbing as the atrocities themselves. People celebrated, justified, denied, or minimized the massacre, while the victims were gradually transformed into villains and their murderers into supposed freedom fighters.

Three years later, the international community still struggles with something that should require absolutely no discussion. Deliberately murdering civilians is terrorism, regardless of the nationality of the victims or the political grievances of the perpetrators.

As a Dutch citizen who has spent decades defending Israel, I have watched my country descend into a level of moral confusion that I once considered unimaginable.

The Netherlands proudly presents itself as a champion of human rights, democracy, and tolerance, yet increasingly tolerates rhetoric that would provoke immediate outrage if directed against almost any population other than Jews.

Criticism of Israeli policies is legitimate, and peaceful demonstrations are fundamental democratic rights, but there is an enormous difference between criticizing a government and creating an atmosphere in which antisemitism flourishes behind fashionable political slogans. When people celebrate the atrocities of Oct. 7, excuse hostage taking, or romanticize Hamas as a resistance movement, they are not defending human rights. They are demonstrating how easily moral principles disappear when the victims happen to be Israeli.

On Sunday, Amsterdam hosted another Red Line demonstration, supposedly dedicated to justice and humanity. Among the announced speakers were Omar Barghouti, cofounder of the international BDS movement, and Medhat Alamawi, associated with the Palestinian Community in the Netherlands. Both have appeared in reporting concerning organizations or networks with alleged connections to Hamas or other extremist movements.

Such reporting does not establish that either individual personally belongs to Hamas, but surely these allegations deserve serious examination before prominent platforms are offered. Have the organizers investigated the reported associations, and are they prepared to explain their conclusions? A demonstration claiming moral authority should welcome scrutiny rather than dismiss uncomfortable questions. Otherwise, I cannot help wondering whether the organizers’ red line represents a universal principle or merely another political slogan that conveniently disappears whenever Jewish lives are involved.

What makes this particularly alarming is that the Dutch intelligence service, the AIVD, has warned about Hamas networks operating within the Netherlands, including activities involving propaganda, lobbying, and fundraising. This does not establish that the demonstration itself is connected to Hamas, nor does it implicate everyone attending. Nevertheless, the existence of such networks is a documented security concern, not some imaginary conspiracy invented by supporters of Israel.

Yet the political and public debate often seems more concerned with protecting the reputation of activist movements than confronting the possibility that extremist organizations exploit democratic freedoms to advance their objectives. Freedom of expression is essential, but it was never intended to provide immunity for terrorist financing, criminal incitement, or intimidation.

We should also remember November 2024, when Israeli soccer supporters were violently attacked in Amsterdam. Images of people being chased through the streets of the Dutch capital should have horrified a nation that knows precisely where antisemitic hatred can lead. Instead, public debate quickly became consumed by arguments about provocation and justification. Apparently, even Jewish and Israeli victims must first prove their innocence before receiving unconditional sympathy. I find this moral bankruptcy absolutely revolting, particularly in a country that annually commemorates the victims of Nazi persecution while struggling to confront contemporary antisemitism.

My greatest concern, however, extends beyond Israel and the Jewish community. Extremist ideologies do not respect national borders, and organizations that glorify violence against civilians cannot automatically be assumed to pose no danger elsewhere. I am not predicting that a terrorist attack in the Netherlands is inevitable, but dismissing the possibility would be extraordinarily irresponsible.

Radicalization develops through propaganda, ideological justification, and networks that can eventually facilitate violence. When society repeatedly excuses terrorism as legitimate resistance, it risks weakening the very moral boundaries that protect everyone. The Dutch authorities have already issued warnings; ignoring them because they complicate a fashionable political narrative would be an astonishing failure of responsibility.

Let me be perfectly clear: Condemning Hamas does not mean condemning Muslims or denying the suffering of innocent “Palestinians.” Civilian suffering deserves compassion regardless of nationality. But compassion must never become an excuse for selective morality. The Netherlands must defend peaceful protest while confronting extremism, investigating credible allegations, and protecting Jewish citizens without hesitation. A democracy that cannot distinguish between legitimate political activism and the glorification of terrorism is placing its own future at risk.

The Netherlands should stop asking whether hatred directed at Israel concerns Dutch society. It already does. The real question is how much further that hatred must spread before the country finally recognizes the danger. You reap what you sow, and a nation that tolerates the normalization of hatred should not be surprised when it eventually faces the consequences.

Sabine Sterk is the founder of Time To Stand Up For Israel.