At least 12 people are dead after two gunmen opened fire at Sydney’s famed Bondi Beach in an attack authorities said targeted the Jewish community during a major holiday celebration. One of the shooters is among the dead while the second is in a critical condition, local police said in a statement. More people have been injured, among them two police officers, authorities said. Police are investigating whether any other assailants were involved. “This attack was designed to target Sydney’s Jewish community, on the first day of Hanukkah,” said Chris Minns, the premier of the state of New South Wales. “What should have been a night of peace and joy celebrated in that community with families and supporters, has been shattered by this horrifying evil attack.” The attack occurred as hundreds of members of Sydney’s Jewish community gathered in Bondi Beach for the annual Hanukkah celebration, among the biggest events of the local Jewish calendar. The event, attended by many families, features the lighting of the menorah, a petting zoo, a children’s climbing wall and other activities. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his “thoughts are with every person affected.” Israel’s President Isaac Herzog called the attack terrorism: “Our hearts go out to our Jewish sisters and brothers in Sydney who have been attacked by vile terrorists as they went to light the first candle of Chanukah.” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen sent “heartfelt condolences” and said “Europe stands with Australia and Jewish communities everywhere,” in a statement. “This appalling act of violence against the Jewish community must be unequivocally condemned,” said Kaja Kallas, the EU’s chief diplomat. The incident is Australia’s worst mass shooting in decades, after the nation’s gun laws were tightened in response to a 1996 massacre in the state of Tasmania.

BERLIN — U.S. President Donald Trump’s overtures to the European far right have never been more overt, but the EU’s biggest far-right parties are split over whether that is a blessing or a curse.  While Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has welcomed Trump’s moral support, viewing it as a way to win domestic legitimacy and end its political ostracization, France’s National Rally has kept its distance — viewing American backing as a potential liability. The differing reactions from the two parties, which lead the polls in the EU’s biggest economies, stem less from varying ideologies than from distinct domestic political calculations. AfD leaders in Germany celebrated the Trump administration’s recent attacks on Europe’s mainstream political leaders and approval of “patriotic European parties” that seek to fight Europe’s so-called “civilizational erasure.” “This is direct recognition of our work,” AfD MEP Petr Bystron said in a statement after the Trump administration released its National Security Strategy — which, in parts, sounds like it could have been a manifesto of a far-right European party — warning that Europe may be “unrecognizable” in two decades due to migration and a loss of national identities. “The AfD has always fought for sovereignty, remigration, and peace — precisely the priorities that Trump is now implementing,” added Bystron, who will be among a group of politicians in his party traveling to Washington this week to meet with MAGA Republicans. One of the AfD’s national leaders, Alice Weidel, also celebrated Trump’s security strategy. “That’s why we need the AfD!” Weidel said in a post after the document was released. By contrast, National Rally leaders in France were generally silent. Thierry Mariani, a member of the party’s national board, explained Trump hardly seemed like an ideal ally. “Trump treats us like a colony — with his rhetoric, which isn’t a big deal, but especially economically and politically,” he told POLITICO. The party’s national leaders, Mariani added, see “the risk of this attitude from someone who now has nothing to fear, since he cannot be re-elected, and who is always excessive and at times ridiculous.”  AFD’S AMERICAN DREAM It’s no coincidence that Bystron is part of a delegation of AfD politicians set to meet members of Trump’s MAGA camp in Washington this week. Bystron has been among the AfD politicians increasingly looking to build ties to the Trump administration to win support for what they frame as a struggle against political persecution and censorship at home. This is an argument members of the Trump administration clearly sympathize with. When Germany’s domestic intelligence agency declared the AfD to be extremist earlier this year, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the move “tyranny in disguise.” During the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice President JD Vance urged mainstream politicians in Europe to knock down the “firewalls” that shut out far-right parties from government. “This is direct recognition of our work,” AfD MEP Petr Bystron said in a statement after the Trump administration released its National Security Strategy. | Britta Pedersen/Picture Alliance via Getty Images AfD leaders have therefore made a simple calculation: Trump’s support may lend the party a sheen of acceptability that will help it appeal to more voters while, at the same time, making it politically harder for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s conservatives to refuse to govern in coalition with their party. This explains why AfD polticians will be in the U.S. this week seeking political legitimacy. On Friday evening, Markus Frohnmaier, deputy leader of the AfD parlimentary group, will be an “honored guest” at a New York Young Republican Club gala, which has called for a “new civic order” in Germany. NATIONAL RALLY SEES ‘NOTHING TO GAIN’ In France, Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally has distanced itself from the AfD and Trump as part of a wider effort to present itself as more palatable to mainstream voters ahead of a presidential election in 2027 the party believes it has a good chance of winning. As part of the effort to clean up its image, Le Pen pushed for the AfD to be ejected from the Identity and Democracy group in the European Parliament last year following a series of scandals that made it something of a pariah. At the same time, National Rally leaders have calculated that Trump can’t help them at home because he is deeply unpopular nationally. Even the party’s supporters view the American president negatively. An Odoxa poll released after the 2024 American presidential election found that 56 percent of National Rally voters held a negative view of Trump. In the same survey, 85 percent of voters from all parties described Trump as “aggressive,” and 78 percent as “racist.”  Jean-Yves Camus, a political scientist and leading expert on French and international far-right movements, highlighted the ideological gaps separating Le Pen from Trump — notably her support for a welfare state and social safety nets, as well as her limited interest in social conservatism and religion.  “Trumpism is a distinctly American phenomenon that cannot be transplanted to France,” Camus said. “Marine Le Pen, who is working on normalization, has no interest in being linked with Trump. And since she is often accused of serving foreign powers — mostly Russia — she has nothing to gain from being branded ‘Trump’s agent in France.’” 

Remigijus Žemaitaitis, leader of Lithuania’s populist Dawn of Nemunas ruling coalition party, has been found guilty of incitement to hatred against Jews and downplaying the Holocaust in a decision by the Vilnius Regional Court. In a Thursday ruling the court said his public statements had “mocked Jewish people, denigrated them, and encouraged hatred toward the Jewish community.” Žemaitaitis was fined €5,000 — a fraction of what the prosecutor had requested — and is at risk of being stripped of his seat in parliament. “This is a politicized decision,” Žemaitaitis said, while indicating he will appeal. The court considered several social media posts in which Žemaitaitis blamed Jews for the “destruction of our nation” and for “contributing to the torture, deportation, and killing of Lithuanians.” After Israeli authorities demolished a Palestinian school on May 7, 2023, Žemaitaitis wrote: “After such events, it is no wonder that statements like this emerge: ‘A Jew climbed the ladder and accidentally fell. Take, children, a stick and kill that little Jew.'” His lawyer, Egidija Belevičienė, told local media that while her client’s remarks “may have been inappropriate and may have shocked some people, they did not reach the level of danger for which a person is punished with a criminal penalty that necessarily results in a criminal record.” Lithuania’s ruling Social Democrats, who share a coalition with Žemaitaitis, have yet to respond to the ruling, noting that it “is not yet final.” In a Thursday social media post the party said any form of antisemitism, hate speech or Holocaust denial “is unacceptable to us and incompatible with our values.” Still, Žemaitaitis’ record of antisemitic comments was known to the Social Democrats when they formed a coalition with his party last November. He had resigned his seat in parliament the previous April after the country’s Constitutional Court ruled he had violated the constitution by making antisemitic statements on social media. “The Social Democrats were not bothered last year … nor are they bothered now,” said Simonas Kairys, deputy leader of the Liberal Movement opposition party. Laurynas Kasčiūnas, chair of the opposition Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats, accused the Social Democrats of suffering from Stockholm syndrome. “They have been taken hostage by Žemaitaitis, and they’re beginning to like it,” he said. The country’s political opposition is calling on the Social Democrats to sever ties with Žemaitaitis — and is threatening to kick him out of the country’s parliament if they won’t. “The Social Democrats could simply tell Žemaitaitis ‘goodbye,’” Kasčiūnas said. If they fail to cut ties after the court’s ruling becomes final, he added, “an impeachment initiative will emerge in the Seimas.” Žemaitaitis has made a name for himself recently for more than antisemitism. In November he tabled a draft law to simplify the process of firing the head of the country’s LRT public broadcaster, sparking public outrage that the government was preparing to install a political flunky in the post. A street protest is scheduled for Dec. 9; as of Thursday over 124,000 people had signed an online petition against the draft law in a country of 2.8 million.

BERLIN — Before Leif-Erik Holm became one of the German far right’s leading figures, he was a morning radio DJ in his home state in eastern Germany celebrated, by his station, for making “the best jokes far and wide.” Ahead of regional elections across Germany next year, Holm, 55, is now set to become the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party’s top candidate in the state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, a largely rural area bordering Poland and the Baltic Sea. With polls showing the AfD in first place at 38 percent support in the state, it’s one of the places where the party — now the largest opposition group in Germany’s national parliament — is within striking distance of taking significant governing power for the first time since its formation over a decade ago. Holm embodies the type of candidate at least some AfD leaders increasingly want at the top of the ticket. With an avuncular demeanor, he eschews the kind of incendiary rhetoric other politicians in the party have embraced and says he seeks dialogue with his political opponents. Asked what his party would do if it takes power in his state next year, Holm rattled off some innocuous-sounding proposals: invest more in education, including STEM subjects, and ensure children of immigrants learn German before they start school. “I’m actually a nice guy,” Holm said. Underneath the guy-next-door image, however, there’s a clear political calculus. National co-head of the party, Alice Weidel, is attempting something of a rebrand, believing that the AfD won’t be able to make the jump to real political power unless it moves away from candidates who embrace openly extreme positions. That means moving away from controversial leaders like Björn Höcke — found guilty by a court for uttering a banned slogan used by Adolf Hitler’s SA storm troopers — and Maximilian Krah, who last year said he would “never say that anyone who wore an SS uniform was automatically a criminal.” Instead, the preferred candidate, at least for Weidel and people in her camp, is someone like Holm, who can present a more sanitized face of the party. But the makeover is proving to be only skin deep, and even Weidel, despite her national leadership role, can’t prevent the mask from slipping. NEW LOOK, SAME POLITICS Since its creation in 2013 as a Euroskeptic party, the AfD has grown more extreme, mobilizing its increasingly radicalized base primarily around the issue of migration. Earlier this year, Germany’s federal domestic intelligence agency — which is tasked with surveilling groups found to be anti-constitutional — deemed the AfD an extremist group. Weidel is now trying to tamp down on the open extremism. The effort is intended to make the AfD more palatable to mainstream conservatives — and to make it harder for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s center-right alliance to refuse to govern in coalition with the party by maintaining the postwar “firewall” around the far right. Weidel’s push to present a more polished party image isn’t necessarily supported by large swaths of the AfD’s rank and file — especially in its strongholds in the former East Germany — who point to the fact that the party’s political ascent coincided with its radicalization. The argument isn’t without merit. Despite its rising extremism, the party came in second in the snap federal election early this year — the best national showing for a far-right party since World War II. The party is now ahead of Merz’s conservatives in polls. Alice Weidel’s push to present a more polished party image isn’t necessarily supported by large swaths of the AfD’s rank and file. | Sean Gallup/Getty Images  Weidel is nevertheless pressing ahead with her drive to try to soften the AfD’s image. As part of this effort, Weidel has tried to somewhat shift her party from its proximity to the Kremlin — seeking closer ties with Republicans in the U.S. From now on, the party will “fight alongside the white knight rather than the black knight,” a person familiar with Weidel’s thinking said. In another remake attempt, earlier this year, an extremist youth group affiliated with the AfD dissolved itself to avert a possible ban that might have damaged the party. Last weekend, a new youth wing was formed that party leaders will have direct control over. Other far-right parties across Europe have made their own rebranding efforts. In France, far-right leader Marine Le Pen has attempted to normalize her party — an effort referred to as dédiabolisation, or “de-demonization” — ditching the open antisemitism of its founders. As part of that push, Le Pen moved to disassociate her party from the AfD in the European Parliament. In Italy, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has moderated her earlier anti-EU, pro-Russia stances. For the AfD, however, the attempted transformation is less a matter of substance — and more a matter of optics. Underneath Weidel’s effort to burnish her party’s reputation, many of its most extreme voices continue to hold sway. THE POLISHED RADICAL Perhaps no AfD leader embodies that tension more than Ulrich Siegmund, the lead candidate for the party in the state of Saxony-Anhalt, where it is polling first at 40 percent support ahead of a regional vote next September. It’s here, in this small state of just over 2 million people, where AfD leaders pin most of their hopes of getting into state government next year — possibly even with an absolute majority. Like Holm, Siegmund too tries to cultivate a regular-guy persona. Even members of opposing parties in the state parliament describe him as friendly and approachable. With over half a million followers on TikTok, he reaches more people than any other state politician in Germany. Perhaps no AfD leader embodies that tension more than Ulrich Siegmund, the lead candidate for the party in the state of Saxony-Anhalt. | Emmanuele Contini/NurPhoto via Getty Images At the same time, Siegmund is clearly connected to the extreme fringe of the party. He was one of the attendees at a secret meeting of right-wing extremists in which a “master plan” to deport migrants and “unassimilated citizens” was reportedly discussed. When news of the meeting broke last year, it sparked sustained protests against the far right across Germany and temporarily dented the AfD’s popularity in polls. Speaking to POLITICO, Siegmund minimized the secret meeting as “coffee klatsch,” claiming the real scandal is how the media overblew the episode. He described himself not as a dangerous extremist — but as a regular guy concerned for his country. “I am a normal citizen, taxpayer and resident of this country who simply wants a better home, especially for his children, for his family, for all of our children,” Siegmund said. “Because I simply cannot stand by and watch our country develop so negatively in such a short time.” Yet, when pressed, Siegmund could not conceal his extremism. He defended the use of the motto “Everything for Germany!” — the banned Nazi phrase that got his party colleague, Höcke, into legal trouble. “I think it goes without saying that you should give your all for your own country,” Siegmund said. “And I think that should also be the benchmark for every politician — to do everything they can for their own country, because that’s what they were elected to do and what they are paid to do.” Siegmund also took issue with the notion that the Nazis perpetrated history’s greatest crime against humanity, so therefore Germans have a special responsibility to avoid such terms. Ulrich Siegmund also took issue with the notion that the Nazis perpetrated history’s greatest crime against humanity, so therefore Germans have a special responsibility to avoid such terms. | Heiko Rebsch/picture alliance via Getty Images “I find this interpretation to be grossly exaggerated and completely detached from reality,” he said. “For me, it is important to look forward and not backward. And of course, we must always learn from history, but not just from individual aspects of history, but from history as a whole.” Siegmund said he couldn’t judge whether the Nazis had perpetrated history’s worst crime, relativizing the Holocaust in a manner reminiscent of some of the most extreme voices in his party. “I don’t presume to judge that,” he said, “because I can’t assess the whole of humanity.” One lesson from Germany’s history, Siegmund added, is that there should be no “language police” or attempts to ban the AfD as extremist, as some centrist politicians advocate. “If you want to ban the strongest force in this country according to opinion polls, then you’re not learning from history either,” he said. INTERNATIONAL NATIONALISTS The AfD’s national leaders privately smarted at Siegmund’s comments for making their faltering rebrand more difficult. (Holm did not respond to a request for comment on the statements.) That’s especially the case because Weidel and other AfD leaders are increasingly looking abroad for the legitimacy they crave at home and fear such rhetoric will complicate the effort. Weidel and people in her circle have sought to forge closer ties to the Trump administration and other right-wing governments, seeing connections with MAGA Republicans in the U.S. and other populist-right parties in Europe as a way of winning credibility for the AfD domestically. In Europe, Weidel has repeatedly visited Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán at his official residence in Budapest. The party is also making an effort to reestablish connections with members of Le Pen’s party in the European Parliament, according to a high-ranking AfD official. Not everyone in the AfD, however, sees eye to eye with Weidel on the attempt to moderate the party image, especially when it comes to relations with Moscow. The AfD’s other national co-leader, Tino Chrupalla, recently told an interviewer on German public television that Vladimir Putin’s Russia poses no threat to Germany. Chrupalla’s rhetoric is much more friendly to the Kremlin, and he’s the preferred party leader among many of the AfD’s most radical supporters in eastern Germany — where pro-Moscow sympathies are more prevalent. Many of the AfD’s followers in the former East Germany, where the party polls strongest, see Weidel, born in the former West Germany, as too mild in her approach. Ultimately, the direction of the AfD — in next year’s state elections and beyond — may well depend on which leader’s vision prevails.

PARIS — The Paris public prosecutor’s office will investigate allegations that Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence platform made antisemitic comments. Several posts by the AI model Grok were widely circulated Wednesday, including the chatbot stating that “the plans for the crematoria at Auschwitz do indeed show facilities designed for disinfection with Zyklon B […] rather than mass executions.” Last July, French prosecutors opened a criminal investigation into X, over allegations that the company manipulated its algorithms for the purposes of “foreign interference.” “The Holocaust denial comments relayed by the artificial intelligence Grok on X have been included in the ongoing investigation conducted by the cybercrime division of the Paris public prosecutor’s office, and the functioning of the AI will be analyzed in this context,” the Paris public prosecutor’s office told POLITICO, confirming a report from AFP. The League for Human Rights, or LDH, also announced Wednesday that it was filing a complaint against the AI model. The messages posted on X by Grok are a “denial of crimes against humanity,” according to the human rights organization. The LDH has chosen to file a complaint “against X,” the procedure applicable when the perpetrator is unknown, said Nathalie Tehio, president of the LDH. Last July, Grok came in for public criticism after a software update designed to enable it to provide more “politically incorrect” opinions. A few days later, xAI announced that it was “actively working to remove inappropriate content.” At 6 p.m. Wednesday, the posts targeted by the LDH were still accessible on the platform. X did not immediately respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.

President Donald Trump’s iron-fisted grip on his party appears to be slipping in ways unseen since the immediate aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Back then, he quickly reasserted himself as the singular, dominant force within the Republican Party, and he may do so again. But the extraordinary rebukes and headwinds the president is now facing — much of it from within his own party — are revealing a GOP beginning to reckon with a post-Trump future. That dynamic crystallized after voters surged to the polls to support Democratic candidates for statewide races in New Jersey, Virginia, Georgia and Pennsylvania, shattering expectations of close contests and signaling that even Trump can’t defy political gravity forever. Trump has spent the days since recycling old grievances, berating members of his own party and choosing sides in a burgeoning intra-MAGA debate about antisemitism and bigotry within the GOP coalition. Asked about the momentum shift, a White House spokesperson said Trump had “delivered on many of the promises he was elected to enact” — from border security to ending taxes on tips to “affordability issues.” “As the architect of the MAGA movement, President Trump will always put America First. Every single day he’s working hard to continue fulfilling the many promises he made and he will continue delivering,” spokesperson Abigail Jackson said. In addition to the election romp, here’s a look at some recent brush-offs, brushbacks and breakups that have threatened Trump’s aura of invincibility. REPUBLICANS REFUSE TO BACK DOWN ON EPSTEIN VOTE A year ago, the idea that a Republican-led Congress would vote overwhelmingly in favor of anything Trump opposed would have been fanciful. Enter the Epstein files. Trump’s coalition has long viewed the FBI’s trove of records related to the late convicted sex offender and disgraced international power broker to be a holy grail of sorts, one that could shed light on a grander sex trafficking conspiracy implicating world leaders and politicians. But Trump, a longtime associate of Epstein’s until they fell out more than a decade ago, spent the summer leaning on congressional Republicans to cease their search for records. Trump has denied wrongdoing and no evidence has suggested he took part in Epstein’s trafficking operation. What happened next was perhaps the most stinging intra-party rebuke of Trump’s presidency. Trump tried and failed to pressure Republican lawmakers to pull the plug on a vote demanding the Justice Department turn over the full library of Epstein files. An intense pressure campaign against Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) in particular went nowhere. The fallout also claimed the relationship of Trump and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, whose refusal to flinch led Trump to brand her a “traitor” and attempt to turn his coalition against her. Greene has responded by saying Trump’s attacks have endangered her life. As a full House vote expected to overwhelming support the release of the Epstein files was just hours away, Trump reversed himself and encouraged Republicans to back the measure, avoiding what looked to be an inevitable black eye. Now White House officials say Trump should get credit for transparency and seeking the release of the files. INDIANA GOP LAWMAKERS DON’T BITE ON REDISTRICTING Trump’s inability to cajole Congress into his preferred course of action on the Epstein files came at virtually the same time the president and his allies failed to move Indiana Republicans to redraw their congressional boundaries to net Republicans another seat in the 2026 midterms. Trump had been pressing for a Hoosier redistricting measure for months, but state GOP leaders signaled they simply lacked the votes to make it a reality, drawing a threat from Trump to endorse some Republicans’ primary challengers. Countermeasures by Democrats in Virginia and California could make Trump’s nationwide push a wash. WARNING SIGNS APPEAR FOR TARIFFS AT THE SUPREME COURT Trump has long proclaimed that wielding tariffs against foreign governments is the key to negotiating favorable trade deals. Never mind that business and Republican orthodoxy has long considered tariffs as a backdoor tax on Americans. But the Supreme Court appeared skeptical of Trump’s approach, with justices he appointed sharply questioning whether the president can leverage emergency powers to tariff foreign governments at will. By all accounts, the argument was a drubbing for Trump’s side. And the president seemed to discover that reality when he vented at the court in a pair of Truth Social posts last week. It’s folly to predict how the high court will rule, even when the justices send clear signals during the arguments. But Trump appears to be bracing for defeat that could have devastating consequences for his economic agenda. His administration has repeatedly emphasized the centrality of tariffs to the recent spate of trade deals he’s made around the world. NO LUCK ON THE FILIBUSTER OR THE BLUE SLIP, EITHER Trump has never had much luck telling the Senate how to run itself. But his recent incursions into Senate procedure have underscored his relative powerlessness in this arena. Trump spent the bulk of the record-setting government shutdown pressuring Senate Republicans to abolish the filibuster, the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to pass most legislation. That threshold has vexed presidents for generations but has long been defended by institutional leaders as a way to prevent national whiplash every time the chamber changes. And Senate Majority Leader John Thune made clear quickly that Trump wasn’t going to get his way. Trump fared no better leaning on Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to scrap the Senate’s 100-year-old tradition of honoring “blue slips,” the power of home-state senators to veto nominees for judgeships and U.S. attorneys they find unacceptable. Grassley has been Trump’s loudest champion on claims that the Justice Department was weaponized against him and has helped unearth records related to those allegations, but Trump has still bristled at Grassley’s refusal to cave on blue slips. Trump has struggled to get some of his preferred nominees across the finish line. TRUMP GETS A ONE-TWO PUNCH AFTER PARDONING 2020 ALLIES Trump announced last week a sweeping pardon of dozens of allies who played roles in his bid to subvert the 2020 election. Though none on the list actually faced federal criminal charges, many had been charged at the state level with seeking to defraud voters or corrupt the election results. Presidents can’t pardon state-level crimes, and within hours of Trump’s sweeping clemency he got a stark reminder. In Nevada, the state Supreme Court revived a criminal case against six of Trump’s pardon recipients who falsely claimed to be legitimate presidential electors. And in Georgia, a supervisory prosecutor reupped the criminal case against Trump himself for seeking to overturn the state’s election results. MAGA REBUKES TRUMP ON 50-YEAR MORTGAGES, H1B VISAS Trump’s feel for his MAGA base has been unerring for most of his decade in presidential politics. And their ardent support has sustained the president through his darkest moments: two impeachments, a slew of criminal indictments and a conviction making him the first former-president-turned-felon to retake the White House. So when his core allies twice sound the alarm that he’s missed the mark on economic policy proposals, it’s worth taking note. That was the case when Trump recently pitched a 50-year mortgage for homeowners, one that was roundly panned by a wide-range of MAGA influencers and created friction between the White House and Trump’s housing czar Bill Pulte. And the reaction from the base was similar when Trump defended issuing H1B visas to foreign workers and proclaimed that U.S. citizens lack “certain talents.” The uproar was swift among some of Trump’s most reliable allies. The administration says Trump’s broader economic agenda has disproportionately benefited U.S.-born workers and is working to weed out abuses in the H1B system.

PARIS — The banks of the Seine were still cloaked in early morning darkness when a security guard at the Paris Holocaust Museum, seated just a stone’s throw from the Notre Dame Cathedral, noticed a suspicious scene. Two men in dark clothes were spraying red paint across the Wall of the Righteous — a stone monument inscribed with the names of those who saved Jews in France during World War II. As the guard gave chase, a third man emerged from the shadows of a nearby building to film the night’s work: 35 red-painted handprints, splashed across the 25-meter wall. The attack, which took place in May of last year, was not an isolated act of hate. Police quickly identified and arrested three Bulgarian suspects whose trial begins in Paris on Wednesday — a case that investigators and intelligence officials say offers a rare window into Russia’s escalating campaign to destabilize France through covert influence and psychological operations. The vandalism of the Holocaust memorial was one of several symbolic assaults to shake the country over the past two years — featuring pig heads dropped at mosques, Stars of David sprayed on buildings, coffins left next to the Eiffel Tower— each seemingly designed to inflame tensions between France’s Jewish and Muslim communities or to erode French support for Ukraine ahead of a pivotal 2027 presidential election. They point to how France has become a hot spot in Russia’s hybrid war against Europe, as Moscow seeks to undermine one of Kyiv’s most powerful backers by aggravating its political and social tensions. Analysts and officials say France presents both a prime target and a weak flank — a nation with global weight but domestic vulnerabilities that make it especially susceptible to manipulation. “This reflects a geopolitical reality: Russia considers France to be a serious adversary, it’s the only nuclear power in the EU, and the president of the Republic is quite vocal on support for Ukraine, considering scenarios such as the deployment of French soldiers to Odesa,” said Kevin Limonier, a professor and deputy director at the GEODE geopolitical research center in Paris, where his team has mapped out Russia’s hybrid war operations in Europe. “In France, we are a little further away from the eastern flank and we don’t have the same level of prevention as the countries from the former Soviet Union,” said Natalia Pouzyreff, a lawmaker from President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party who co-authored a report on foreign interference earlier this year.  “The population is more receptive to this kind of rhetoric.”  RED HANDED French authorities have accused four men of orchestrating the defacement of the Holocaust memorial. The three allegedly on the scene, Mircho Angelov, Georgi Filipov and Kiril Milushev, fled Paris that same morning by bus to Brussels, then boarded a flight to Sofia.  Filipov and Milushev were later arrested by Bulgarian authorities and extradited to France. A fourth man, Nikolay Ivanov, suspected of financing the operation, was arrested in Croatia. Angelov remains at large. The men stand accused of conspiring to deface the monument, with the aggravating circumstance of acting on antisemitic motives. French investigators also suspect they may have acted, knowingly or not, as Russian agents. The operation could “correspond to an attempt to destabilize France orchestrated by the Russian intelligence services,” according to an assessment by the domestic intelligence agency DGSI cited in a note from the prosecutor’s office.  French authorities have accused four men of orchestrating the defacement of the Holocaust memorial. | Dimitar Dilkoff/Getty Images The same assessment links the act to “a broader strategy” aimed at “dividing French public opinion or fueling internal tensions by using ‘proxies’, meaning individuals who are not working for those services but are paid by them for ad hoc tasks via intermediaries.” During preliminary hearings, Filipov and Milushev did not deny being present but pointed to Angelov as the main orchestrator. The Paris raid wasn’t the first time members of the group had met: Angelov, Ivanov and Milushev are all from Blagoevgrad, a town in southwestern Bulgaria close to the border with North Macedonia. Contacted by POLITICO, Milushev’s lawyer Camille Di Tella said her client, a longtime casual acquaintance of Angelov, had only filmed the tagging without actively participating in the vandalism and “was not aware of what he was really meant to do” when he agreed on the trip. Martin Vettes, a lawyer for Filipov, declined to comment on the case ahead of the trial.  Vladimir Ivanov, a lawyer for Nikolay Ivanov, said his client only paid for hotel nights and bus tickets as a service to Angelov. He strongly denied his client had antisemitic motives or was aware of any Russian connection. POLITICO was unable to reach Angelov for comment. The DGSI declined to comment for this story.   Angelov’s Facebook feed, identified by POLITICO, includes selfies from around Europe, from Greek beaches to the Swiss Alps. Pictures of him show large tattoos covering his chest, upper arms and legs, featuring neo-Nazi symbols including the numbers 14 and 88 and a black Totenkopf, the emblem of a prominent SS division.  On May 12, two days before the attack on the memorial, Angelov posted a picture of himself in front of the Notre Dame Cathedral wearing a blue T-shirt and ripped jeans that partly concealed his tattoos. During his brief stop in Brussels he shared another picture taken in front of a glass building, followed by a winking emoji. The red handprints painted on the memorial are a symbol used by some pro-Palestinian activists to denounce the war in Gaza. But they are also seen by Jewish groups and scholars as a reference to the killing of two Israeli soldiers during the second Intifada in the 2000s, and a call for antisemitic violence.  The attack coincided with the anniversary of the first mass arrest of Jews in France under the Nazi occupation, drawing condemnation across France’s political spectrum. That evening, museum staff and local organizations held an impromptu vigil outside the site. “In a climate of rising antisemitism, we are shocked by this cowardly and heinous act,” Jacques Fredj, the memorial director, posted on social media. Privately, museum employees were hesitant to attribute the attack to pro-Palestinian groups. “We didn’t see the logic of it coming from activists,” said one of them, who declined to speak on the record given the sensitivity of the subject.  The Intifada reference felt old and out of touch, the museum employee said. The attacks also felt similar to a 2023 incident in which Stars of David were tagged across the French capital in an operation French prosecutors described as possible foreign interference.  The Paris prosecutor’s office also cited a report by Viginum, France’s national agency monitoring online disinformation, that found news stories about the red handprints were amplified by “thousands of fake accounts on Twitter” linked to the Russian Recent Reliable News/Doppelgänger network — a group already implicated in spreading reports about the Stars of David. FOREIGN INTERFERENCE The trial opening Wednesday is just one of nine cases involving attacks on religious communities or high-profile French monuments under investigation by the Paris prosecutor’s office since late 2023.  The most recent is from Sept. 9, when Najat Benali, rector of the Javel mosque in southeastern Paris, was woken by a call from worshippers attending the early morning prayer. They had been shocked to find a pig head drenched in blood at the mosque’s entrance.  The vandalism of the Holocaust memorial was one of several symbolic assaults to shake the country over the past two years. | Antonin Utz/Getty Images Benali rushed to the scene. “It was still dark, I got scared,” she said. She alerted local officials and learned that eight other mosques had been targeted. Prosecutors quickly traced the act to a group of Serbian nationals after a Normandy pig farmer flagged a suspicious bulk purchase. The pig heads were dropped “by foreign nationals who immediately left [French] soil, in a manifest attempt to cause unrest within the nation,” said a note from the Paris prosecutor’s office dated mid-September. Later that month, Serbia announced the arrest of 11 of its citizens related to the incident.  Serbian authorities said the group is also suspected of throwing green paint on Paris synagogues and a well-known Paris falafel restaurant situated in the capital’s old Jewish neighborhood.  Allegations of foreign interference do little to alleviate the distress felt by the Muslim community, said Bassirou Camara, head of Addam, a nonprofit organization keeping track of anti-Muslim attacks.  “It doesn’t diminish the feeling of fear and disgust,” Camara said. “Because we know they are exploiting a crack that already exists.” France’s deep social, economic, cultural, religious and political divisions offer fertile ground for the Kremlin’s interference, several policymakers, academics and military officers told POLITICO. Unlike Russia’s neighbors such as Estonia or Lithuania, France is also unused to being the subject of Russian propaganda. Even though it’s a NATO member, the country historically saw itself as an independent ally of the U.S. and before the invasion of Ukraine kept open channels with the Kremlin. “Before, the Russians didn’t want to upset France because it had a kind of non-aligned role,” said a high-ranking French military officer, who was granted anonymity to talk candidly about a sensitive topic. “Now, they think they need to fracture our society and show the French that Emmanuel Macron is leading them down the wrong path.”   Large segments of the French political spectrum are also historically friendly to Russia. Far-right leader Marine Le Pen, long accused of cozying up to Vladimir Putin, has sought to distance herself from the Russian president since he launched Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile, leftist firebrand Jean-Luc Mélenchon is a fierce critic of NATO.  “There is an ambiguous ground in France, with a primitive anti-Americanism that sometimes swings into pro-Russian sentiment as a mirror effect,” the military officer explained. “We are paying for our historical position on Russia; we have always allowed a certain amount of doubt to linger, and the French have been fed on that.”  Stoking tensions in France requires little effort in a society already on edge. “The Russian intelligence sphere understands the cleavages in society,” said Kristine Berzina, a senior fellow and security expert at the German Marshall Fund think tank. It has “this very particular awareness and desire to instrumentalize highly painful domestic political issues and opportunism to tap those pain points at the right moment of political salience.”  One major flashpoint is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. France is home to the EU’s largest Muslim and Jewish populations — roughly 5 million and 450,000 people, respectively. “French society, with its Jewish and Muslim minorities, is the perfect breeding ground for provocation,” said a Paris-based European diplomat.   On the day the pig heads were dropped, local leaders denounced a rise in violence against Muslims.  France is home to the EU’s largest Muslim and Jewish populations — roughly 5 million and 450,000 people, respectively. | Geoffrey Van Der Hasselt/Getty Images “These clearly coordinated acts mark a new and sad step up in the rise of anti-Muslim hatred, and aim to divide our national community,” Chems-eddine Hafiz, rector of Paris Great Mosque, said in a statement.  Figures from the left were quick to blame “a toxic climate … fueled by the stigmatizing rhetoric of certain politicians,” pointing their fingers at the country’s far-right leaders. EASTERN EXAMPLES Several experts said they expect Russia to ramp up operations ahead of the 2027 French election, when Le Pen’s National Rally — a party far less sympathetic to Ukraine’s plight than Macron — may have its best shot yet at taking the presidency.  In the meantime, French officials have taken note of the spate of attacks. In May the government announced a new policy regarding Russian cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns, promising to call out foreign governments in an effort to raise awareness. The country has also beefed up its legal arsenal. Last year, lawmakers toughened penalties for violence “committed at the behest of a foreign power.”  French authorities are reaching out to countries such as Estonia, Poland, Finland and Sweden to better understand the Russian psyche, several French officials told POLITICO.  France has valuable lessons to learn from frontline nations, many of which spent decades under Soviet control, the officials said. These include fostering media literacy and raising awareness of the threat of disinformation instead of focusing on countering fake news and spreading counternarratives. The new approach may already be starting to bear fruit. The French public is becoming more savvy at spotting foreign interference, said Pouzyreff, the Renaissance party lawmaker, referring to the pig heads episode.  “After having reported one, two, three attempts at interference, by the fourth the public was waiting for more information and [the controversy] deflated much more quickly,” she said. 

The EU should swiftly pull funding from organizations that fail to uphold its values, and do more to tackle hate speech, France, Austria and the Netherlands urged in an informal document seen by POLITICO. Citing a surge in antisemitic and racist incidents following the Hamas attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 and the war in Gaza, the three countries call on Brussels and national capitals to “redouble their efforts to combat racism, antisemitism, xenophobia and anti-Muslim hatred” and ensure that “no support is given to entities hostile to European values, in particular through funding.” The document lays out proposals to tighten financial oversight and expand the EU’s criminal and operational response to hate crimes. It calls on the European Commission to fully apply existing budget rules allowing for the exclusion of entities inciting hatred, and to make beneficiaries of programs such as Erasmus+ and CERV (Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values) sign pledges that they will respect and promote EU rights and values. The document comes just one day before a European Council meeting in Brussels at which EU leaders are expected to discuss support to Ukraine, defense, and also housing, competitiveness, migration, and the green and digital transitions. According to a draft of the Council conclusions obtained by POLITICO, national leaders are expected to stress that EU values apply equally in the digital sphere, with the protection of minors singled out as a key priority. Beyond funding, the document demands tougher measures against online and offline hate speech. It also urges Europol to launch a project looking at hate crimes and calls for education and awareness programs on tolerance and Holocaust remembrance through Erasmus+ and CERV.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said Monday that a ceasefire in Gaza and the release by Hamas of all the remaining Israeli hostages could be achieved within a week, stressing Europe’s role in securing a deal. “I hope that within the next week we can reach an initial agreement — meaning a ceasefire, the release of the hostages, and humanitarian aid for Gaza,” Wadephul told Paul Ronzheimer of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, of which POLITICO is a member, during an interview in Tel Aviv. Wadephul, who was in Israel for talks with his counterpart, dismissed recent claims by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Europe has been “absent” in finding a resolution to the war and that it has “caved in to Palestinian terrorism.” “Europe is important — the United Kingdom and France are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, and both matter. The European Union as a whole is also important,” Wadephul said, arguing that Germany has also played an active role. “Yesterday, I spoke with the Qatari foreign minister and prime minister — the key man in contact with Hamas … Tonight, I’ll fly to Cairo to meet the Egyptian foreign minister,” he said. “I’m doing exactly what a foreign minister should: Building understanding, exchanging positions, helping mediate, building bridges … Whether it ultimately helps achieve success, we’ll see — but it’s my duty to keep trying.” Reflecting on the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks that killed some 1,200 people two years ago, Wadephul said he had warned colleagues early on that Israel’s retaliation would eventually test Western support: “At some point people would start saying, ‘Israel is overdoing it now.’” He expressed disappointment at Germany’s solidarity demonstrations, which he attended in the wake of the deadly attack, noting that “empathy wasn’t as widespread or as strong as I had hoped” and citing a “certain alienation” linked to Israel’s settlement policies. “Many came, yes — but not enough to fill the entire Straße des 17. Juni up to the Victory Column. That’s how it should have been — but it wasn’t,” he said. “That deep empathy, that solidarity wasn’t as widespread or as strong as I had hoped.” On the topic of combating rising antisemitism, which has been reported around Europe during the past two years, Wadephul said: “Of course, antisemitism itself still exists. Some exploit it politically. And yes — though I don’t say this to justify anything — at times, unwise policies by Israeli governments have contributed to this climate too.” Clarifying that this is not his view, he said: “That’s how some people perceive it. I speak with citizens — I’m a directly elected MP — and I see how criticism of Israel often merges with antisemitic attitudes. That’s wrong, but it happens. And we have to acknowledge it before we can confront it.” He also condemned Israel’s Gaza blockade earlier this year while reaffirming Berlin’s commitment to Israel’s security: “Israel is our most important security partner in the Middle East — and it always will be.”

Adam Langleben is Executive Director of Progressive Britain and has served as National Secretary of the Jewish Labour Movement  On Thursday morning, Yom Kippur morning, my family and I left our north London synagogue earlier than usual. We made a conscious decision not to linger, not to chat with friends outside, as we often would.  Before stepping onto the street, we removed our young children’s kippot — not a decision made lightly. We did so out of fear. By then we’d heard what had happened at Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation in Manchester. As we left, there was a van of police officers stationed outside, doing exactly what the government had promised just an hour earlier: protecting our community. I am grateful for that.  My son attends a Jewish day school where there’s a permanent security presence, and often a heavy police presence over the past two years too. Every morning, when I drop him off, I experience what it means to raise a Jewish child in Britain in 2025. Police outside school is so normal now that he has never asked me why they are there. The Community Security Trust, or CST, is the charity that protects British Jews from antisemitism and terrorism. It trains volunteers to guard synagogues, schools and community centers, and administers the government grant to help guard Jewish buildings. I have been one of their volunteers. I have worn the stab vest. I have stood at the gates of synagogues. The threat has been very real for decades. For British Jews, including me, a murderous attack on a synagogue like the one that unfolded in northwest England on Thursday was always something we’d expected — a question of when rather than if. Our fear was born from experience, history and security assessments. For two years, the temperature has been heating up. The almost weekly protests, the chants, the placards, the online abuse. Most Jews share the feeling that something terrible is happening in British society — that a threshold has been crossed.  The danger was never hypothetical. We knew it was inevitable. It might have been in Manchester this time, but it could have been anywhere. But this attack isn’t just a Jewish problem. It is a challenge to Britain as a whole. For two years, and across two different governments, a culture has been allowed to develop in which deeply irresponsible speech, sometimes lawful and sometimes not, has filled our streets week after week. We have been told that free speech, even if it makes minorities feel uncomfortable, is the price we pay for living in a free society. I used to believe that. I used to think that free speech was such a bedrock principle that my unease as a Jew walking through a hostile crowd was a small sacrifice in the bigger scheme of things. But I no longer think that; my thinking has changed. The near-weekly pro-Palestinian protests have had a cumulative effect. They’ve normalized intimidation. They’ve created an atmosphere where citizens, whether Jewish or not, don’t feel safe in their own cities and neighborhoods. They’ve  blurred the line between protest and communal harassment.  Some of what has been shouted and chanted is explicitly unlawful. Much of it sits in a gray area, just within legal bounds. And when it goes beyond the boundaries there’s no zeal from authorities to pursue a case. But the effect is the same: vulnerable communities feel menaced, targeted, and despite the police presence outside places of worship still unprotected. Antisemitism is not just another prejudice. At its core it is a conspiracy theory — the oldest one: the belief that Jews, collectively, are secretly responsible for the world’s ills. The late Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks described it as a “light sleeper.” It never disappears. Sometimes it lies dormant, waiting to be triggered by new myths, new accusations, new crises. History shows us the pattern. From the medieval blood libel, to Christian and feudal antisemitism, to the 20th century when Jews were painted as sub-human, capitalists or communists, the conspiracy mutates, never dies.  Antisemitism is not just another prejudice. At its core it is a conspiracy theory — the oldest one: the belief that Jews, collectively, are secretly responsible for the world’s ills. | Paul Ellis/AFP via Getty Images To most, slogans like Globalize the Intifada are interpreted as calls for Palestinian liberation, but for some, a minority yes, it is a call to action to attack Jews anywhere in the world — and chanting antisemitic slogans gives permission for violent extremists. That is why language matters. Words can stir the sleeper. The worst possible accusation that can be made against Jews, individually or collectively, is genocide. Whether such claims stand up to evidence is for time and international law and the courts to decide. But the shouting and screaming on our streets that Jews — in a collective form, as Israel — are guilty of genocide carries a chilling echo. It is not so different from the old blood libel. And we know what happens next. To those on the fringes of society who already view Jews as uniquely malevolent, this language is seen as permission. If Jews are committing the worst crime imaginable, then surely, they tell themselves, violence against them is justified. That is the twisted logic of antisemitism. And I fear that’s exactly what we have just seen play out in Manchester. Anxiety about reckless speech isn’t confined to one group. That same gray area has been exploited against other minorities by rabble-rousers like Tommy Robinson, and by thugs of all stripes who use the cloak of “protest” and “free speech” to launder their hate in public spaces.  We know, too, that the majority of people on marches do not come with malice. But intent is not the only thing that matters. Outcomes matter too. And the outcome, time and again, has been intimidation. Organizers of demonstrations cannot simply wash their hands of responsibility. If hateful groups use marches as cover for hate or intimidation, then it is the duty of protest organizers to act and to ensure those people are clearly unwelcome. Freedom of assembly doesn’t absolve them of responsibility. We need a fundamental rethink. Free speech is indeed an important democratic right, but it also entails a responsibility. When rights conflict, we must decide which one prevails. The right of British citizens — Jewish, Muslim, Black, Asian, LGBT, or anyone else — to go about their lives without fear of harassment or violence is as fundamental as any other democratic right. And in today’s hyper-polarized society, that surely must come first. This does not mean banning protests. It does mean redrawing the boundaries of the behavior we allow in our public spaces. It means recognizing that speech and assembly, even if technically lawful, can corrode the sense of safety that communities should be able to have. And it means governments and police forces enforcing that principle consistently across the board. Above all, it requires people to police their own speech — and especially leaders. Words have consequences and sometimes they can be deadly.