In recent weeks, European climate activists, including Extinction Rebellion and Swedish environmentalist Greta Thunberg, have found themselves entangled in a complex web of controversy following their public criticism of Israel. These protests and messages of support for Palestinians have not only prompted online backlash but have also raised internal questions within the environmental movement.
The backdrop to this controversy is the long-running tension in the Middle East, which escalated on October 7th when Hamas militants carried out a devastating attack in southern Israel, resulting in the tragic loss of 1,400 lives. In retaliation, Israeli strikes have claimed the lives of at least 5,087 Palestinians, including 2,055 children, as reported by the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza.
The situation took a dramatic turn in the Netherlands when 19 Extinction Rebellion activists were detained after occupying the entrance to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. They accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of committing “war crimes” and overseeing an “apartheid regime,” allegations strongly denied by the Israeli government. The protesters demanded that the Dutch government cease its military cooperation with Israel, all while expressing their concerns about the global rise in antisemitism.
This controversy reached international attention when Greta Thunberg, known for her global climate activism, posted a social media message in support of Palestine. Her Instagram and X (formerly known as Twitter) posts featured a sign calling for “solidarity with Palestine and Gaza.” The official X account of Israel responded, critiquing the use of non-sustainable materials by Hamas for their rockets and highlighting the loss of innocent lives. This exchange stirred debate, with an IDF spokesperson initially characterizing anyone associating with Greta as a “terror supporter,” later retracting those comments.
Interestingly, the response from European climate movements appears to be divided. While these movements had widely condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the past without much backlash, the mass casualties in the Israel-Palestine conflict exposed divisions within the environmental movement.
The German branch of Fridays for Future, known for its clashes with the global organization over its positions on Israel, expressed solidarity with the victims of Hamas’s violence. They condemned terrorism and hoped for the safe return of all hostages. Luisa Neubauer, a Fridays for Future activist, emphasized their “unlimited solidarity” with Jewish people while also expressing concerns about rising anti-Muslim racism and the suffering of civilians in Gaza. Neubauer asserted that holding these sentiments simultaneously was not contradictory, signifying that their hearts were large enough to empathize with all these aspects.
This controversy within the environmental movement illustrates the complex interplay between climate activism, geopolitical conflicts, and the evolving landscape of public opinion. It highlights the challenges that activists face when they choose to speak out on matters beyond the immediate scope of environmental concerns.
As this situation unfolds, it continues to spark debate and discussion about the role of activists in addressing global issues and the complexities surrounding the Israel-Palestine conflict.