This is the problem of having placed Germans in key positions at the EU as they impose their own pro-Zionist policies upon the Union itself
David Cronin is an associate editor of The Electronic Intifada
Cross-posted from The Electronic Intifada
Katharina von Schnurbein, an EU official who has been praised as an “unwavering partner” by Israel.
European Union
The European Union is accusing me of “disinformation” for reporting accurately about how it works in tandem with Israel to weaponize anti-Semitism.
The accusation was made after I filed a formal complaint about how the Brussels bureaucracy was keeping secret details of who paid for a May 2025 trip to Israel undertaken by Katharina von Schnurbein, the EU’s coordinator for combating anti-Semitism.
The complaint was made to the European Ombudsman, which sent me a report of a meeting it held with several Brussels officials while assessing my complaint.
That report refers to “articles about the coordinator amounting to disinformation, written by the complainant” – i.e. me.
It says that the officials representing the European Commission – the EU’s executive – at the meeting “shared a sample of relevant articles” with the Ombudsman’s “inquiry team.”
The EU is increasingly using “disinformation” claims to try to muzzle or otherwise punish journalists and academics with whom it disagrees.
Victims of such claims include Hüseyin Dogru, a German citizen who is unable to travel or access his bank account because the EU has imposed sanctions on him over material published on Red, a website which he founded.
The content on Red to which the EU took umbrage concerned the Gaza genocide, the Russia-Ukraine conflict and protests against Israel in Germany.
The EU defines “disinformation” as “false or misleading content that is spread with an intention to deceive or secure economic or political gain, and which may cause public harm.”
I have been investigating and writing about the activities of Katharina von Schnurbein for The Electronic Intifada since 2016. In the ensuing decade, the European Commission has not once pointed out a factual inaccuracy in my articles on von Schnurbein or sought a clarification.
The meeting report sent to me by the European Ombudsman is the first document I have seen in which I am accused of “disinformation.”
The report suggests that the European Commission previously referred to articles written by me, while handling the freedom of information request I had made concerning von Schnurbein’s Israel trip.
However, the European Commission’s reply to an appeal I had lodged following the initial rejection of my request did not directly or explicitly make accusations against me.
That reply claims “there is a real and non-hypothetical risk that the processing of the person mentioned in your request’s data and its public disclosure would harm her privacy and subject her to unsolicited external contacts. Indeed, the person, even though she is not a high-level official and does not form part of the senior management of the EU, has already been the subject of journalistic articles attacking, not only her professional capacities, but also her personal character.”
The reply does not specify who wrote the “journalistic articles” in question.
Racist endeavor
Having learned that the allegation apparently concerned my own work, I strongly object to the insinuations made by the European Commission.
The articles I have written about von Schnurbein have not involved ad hominem attacks.
Rather, they have examined how she conflates bigotry against Jews based on their religion or ethnicity with opposition to Israel’s crimes and Zionism, the ideology underpinning those crimes.
That von Schnurbein resorts to such conflation is implicitly confirmed by the meeting report from the European Ombudsman.
Citing arguments made by von Schnurbein’s colleagues at the European Commission, the report says that she “engages in the global fight against anti-Semitism in all its forms as defined by the definition of anti-Semitism by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.”
The IHRA definition was drafted by pro-Israel lobbyists. At least one of its drafters – Kenneth Stern, a former staff member with the American Jewish Committee – has opposed how it is being invoked to suppress free speech.
That definition is accompanied by 11 “examples [which] may serve as examples” of anti-Semitism. Seven of those “examples” concern Israel.
Among them is the assertion that “the existence of the state of Israel is a racist endeavor.”
It is a simple fact that Israel is a racist endeavor.
The quasi-constitutional Law of Return allows Jews throughout the world to live in Israel and be granted Israeli citizenship. Palestinians and their direct descendants forced out of historic Palestine by Zionist forces in the 1940s are, by contrast, denied the right to go home solely because they are not Jewish.
Discriminating against people based on religion or ethnicity is the very epitome of a racist endeavor.
After initially declining to release any details of who paid for von Schnurbein’s May 2025 Israel trip, the European Commission is finally being a little more forthcoming.
A note from the Ombudsman says that the European Commission’s representatives have “confirmed that the work trip in question was an official mission, the costs of which were covered by the Commission.”
The European Commission has still not released any of the receipts or other documentation relating to the visit’s expenses. In particular, it has not spelled out whether von Schnurbein enjoyed any meals or refreshments paid for by Israel or its lobbying network.
To “justify” its secrecy, the European Commission says that freedom of information requests are processed if they concern its senior management or a “public figure acting in a public capacity.”
According to the European Commission, von Schnurbein is not part of its senior management. The argument is deceptive.
Von Schnurbein is the most senior civil servant in Brussels handling the anti-Semitism dossier. She works in the European Commission’s core administration, under the political leadership of Ursula von der Leyen, the institution’s president.
Furthermore, von Schnurbein is demonstrably a public figure.
She has been on numerous public platforms, representing the European Commission.
In late January, she was the main speaker during an event at the European Parliament. The event was held in public.
I asked the European Commission to explain why it is now accusing me of “disinformation” when it has never once identified a factual error in my articles about von Schnurbein.
The European Commission did not answer the question. A spokesperson said, “In the European Union, individuals, political, media and other actors have the right to express themselves freely. The Commission upholds the rights to freedom of expression, which is enshrined in the Charter [of Fundamental Rights].”
“As your requests relate to an ongoing Ombudsman inquiry, we are not in a position to provide further comments,” the European Commission spokesperson added.
Ali Abunimah, the executive director of The Electronic Intifada, roundly rejects the European Commission’s claims.
“The Electronic Intifada’s reporting on the European Union, particularly on the pro-Israel activities of Katharina von Schnurbein, is done with the highest attention to accuracy and journalistic best practices,” he said.
“At no time has the European Commission challenged our reporting and when we asked the Commission to point us to any examples that qualified as ‘disinformation,’ its spokesperson was unable to do so.”
He added: “We will be unyielding in defending our truthful journalism and our right to report on matters of public interest despite such smears or any attempts at censorship.”
There is a sordid irony behind how the European Commission is alleging that I have practiced “disinformation.”
Von Schnurbein has herself been responsible for making false and misleading claims.
During the May 2025 Middle East trip, she dismissed the voluminous evidence that Israel had been carrying out massacres in Gaza as “rumors about Jews.” She even sought to smear fellow EU officials by contending that a bake sale they organized for a Red Cross Gaza appeal risked causing “ambient anti-Semitism.”
Her comments during that trip followed earlier slurs on the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement.
In 2019, von Schnurbein spread the fake and patently malicious allegation that BDS activists targeted the American singer known as Matisyahu solely because he was Jewish.
Matisyahu had actually been denounced by activists because he took part in fundraising for Israel’s military.
Back in 2020, I reported how von Schnurbein’s formal job description does not mention Israel at all.
Despite lacking a mandate to act on Israel’s behalf, she has consistently pursued a pro-Israel agenda.
Her bias has been applauded by the Israeli government. A new feature on von Schnurbein in the Tel Aviv newspaper Haaretz reminds us that Israel’s foreign ministry has called her an “unwavering partner.”
Monitoring how the EU-Israel partnership manifests itself involves putting information into the public domain.
The information is undoubtedly embarrassing for EU officials such as von Schnurbein. But there is a marked difference between information and disinformation.
I refuse to be silenced or intimidated by Katharina von Schnurbein or any other EU representative. If they keep on accommodating Israel’s crimes, then I will continue to chronicle how they do so.
Be the first to comment