The feeling of safety among students and faculty at Dutch universities has significantly worsened over the past year. Recently, a large-scale survey was published, confirming and quantifying these concerns. Eliyahu Sapir, one of the researchers that conducted the survey, summarizes the findings for DutchTown and proposes potential courses of action.
As recently featured in DutchTown, a comprehensive survey was conducted in September 2024 among Jewish and Israeli students and faculty members at Dutch universities and professional higher education institutions (Hogescholen). The study aimed to document their experiences during the protests at Dutch academic institutions that followed the murderous terror attack by Hamas and its collaborators on October 7, 2023.
Respondents shared, in their own words, how these experiences affected their daily lives and sense of security. They also provided details on the support they received from universities, the police, and Jewish organizations. In total, 165 testimonies were collected from students, academic, and administrative staff, in Hebrew, Dutch, and English. Spanning nearly 100,000 words, these testimonies form a comprehensive database, offering deep insights into the rising hostility faced by Jewish and Israeli members of the academic community.
Respondents’ Experiences During Anti-Israel Protests
Students and faculty were asked to detail their exposure to incidents they considered antisemitic. Rather than providing a predefined operationalization of antisemitism, we allowed respondents to describe these experiences in their own words. The collected data were analyzed using supervised machine learning, mapping a wide spectrum of experiences, ranging from overt aggression to subtler forms of exclusion. After this mapping, human validation further expanded and deepened the analysis, ensuring the identification of relevant themes while preserving the context and sentiments expressed in the testimonies.
The findings presented in Figure 1 illustrate the variety of negative experiences respondents encountered during the protests, revealing the hostile and charged atmosphere that characterized these events. The most frequently reported experience, mentioned by roughly one quarter of respondents, was exposure to anti-Israel and anti-Zionist discourse, which often escalated into antisemitic rhetoric. Approximately 16% of respondents reported experiencing social exclusion or facing calls for their exclusion, while a similar proportion recounted instances of intimidation, hatred, or harassment, amplifying their feelings of vulnerability and isolation.
Around 10% of respondents reported accusations against Israel of committing genocide or crimes against humanity, along with calls for Israel’s destruction, most notably the ‘from the river to the sea’ chants. Similar shares reported calls for intifada, collective blame of Jews and Israelis for Israeli policies, or denial of Israel’s right to exist.
More than 10% of interviewees reported hostility based on their Jewish appearance or background. Between 5-10% testified to comparisons between Israel and Nazis, online attacks, and general hate speech. Additionally, smaller percentages of respondents mentioned support for terrorism against Israel, threats of violence against Jews and Israelis, dehumanization, and accusations of dual loyalty.
Institutional Response to Anti-Israel Protests
To assess the institutional response to the hate speech and hostile atmosphere that accompanied the anti-Israel protests, interviewees were asked how their institutions reacted to the antisemitic incidents they encountered and whether they felt adequately supported by university administration. The findings presented in Figure 2 show that in their view, institutional responses were largely inadequate in addressing the issues they faced.
The vast majority of participants believed that Dutch academic institutions failed to respond appropriately to the protests and its accompanying hate speech. Approximately one-third stated that their institution took no effective action to address the problem, while 20% reported that while some actions were taken, they were insufficient to lead to meaningful improvements. An additional 10% noted that institutional responses were limited to vague, non-committing statements.
Overall, fewer than 20% of respondents felt that their institutions responded adequately. Around 10% indicated that the university’s response to antisemitic incidents was effective, 4% praised institutions for increasing security measures and offering emotional or psychological support, and a similar percentage commended their institution for refusing to sever ties with Israel.
Sense of Security Among Jewish and Israeli Students and Faculty
Participants were also asked to assess their sense of safety within their educational institutions, using a scale ranging from 0 (complete sense of security) to 10 (severe sense of danger).
The results indicate a concerning trend: nearly two-thirds of respondents expressed feelings of insecurity or danger, scoring between 6 and 10. More than half reported a moderate sense of insecurity (6-8), while 5% described a pronounced sense of danger (9-10). Conversely, around one-third of respondents indicated they felt safe or had no particular concerns about their security on campus, scoring between 0 and 4.
These findings underscore that a significant proportion of Jewish and Israeli students and faculty feel their personal safety is at risk, severely impacting their daily lives. Many respondents believe that Dutch universities are failing to provide a safe environment, leaving them in a constant state of worry about their well-being.
The average sense of danger reported by students and staff at each university is presented in Figure 3. The results indicate that the danger felt by Jews and Israelis at most universities following the protests was at a medium-high level. At Erasmus University Rotterdam and the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the sense of insecurity among Jewish and Israeli community members was the highest (above 6 on average), while at the Universities of Groningen and Utrecht, there was a relative sense of security (scores below 5). At other universities, the sense of danger was at a medium level (5-6).
Summary and Recommendations
The results paint a troubling picture of pervasive insecurity among Jewish and Israeli students and faculty members across various academic institutions. Most respondents reported feeling unsafe in their academic environment, suggesting that current institutional efforts to promote safety and inclusion are falling short. The incidents described by participants frequently involved anti-Israel or anti-Zionist rhetoric, social exclusion, and intimidation or bullying. Such behaviors were often linked with the broader political discourse and heightened social tensions on campuses, contributing to a hostile atmosphere for Jews and Israelis.
One key finding is the significant gap between the experiences of Jewish and Israeli community members and the actions taken by universities to address their concerns. Many respondents felt that their institutions failed to respond adequately to antisemitism, underscoring the need for substantial improvements in university policies. The research also reveals considerable variation between institutions, with some universities reporting higher rates of antisemitic incidents and distinct forms of antisemitic or anti-Israel rhetoric. This variability calls for institution-specific approaches to effectively address the unique challenges at each university.
The researchers propose several recommendations for universities:
- Develop and enforce a clear zero-tolerance policy on antisemitism, including concrete definitions, reporting mechanisms, and consequences for violations.
- Establish transparent and accessible systems for reporting antisemitic incidents, coupled with protocols for swift and effective responses.
- Engage proactively with Jewish and Israeli student groups to understand their concerns, fostering ongoing dialogue to inform policy development and coping strategies.
- Craft guidelines that protect freedom of expression while preventing hate speech and harassment, including clearer rules for demonstrations, protests, and the use of inflammatory slogans or symbols.
- Regularly monitor the campus climate, particularly the experiences of Jewish and Israeli students and faculty, to track progress and identify areas for improvement.
- Promote collaboration between universities, Jewish organizations, and other stakeholders to share best practices and develop coordinated strategies to combat antisemitism in higher education.
- Strengthen mental health services, providing tailored support to students and staff who have experienced antisemitism or other forms of discrimination.
The findings emphasize the urgent need for immediate action to combat antisemitism in Dutch higher education. While the challenges are significant, they offer universities an opportunity to reaffirm their commitment to inclusion, diversity, and academic excellence. By adopting these recommendations and fostering a culture of respect and understanding, Dutch academic institutions can create environments where all students and faculty can thrive both academically and personally.
