Anne Applebaum: 'The Far Right Doesn't Want Jews in Europe, That's Why They Like Israel'
This year's Munich Security Conference was anything but routine. The diplomats, leaders and geopolitical strategists there witnessed a seismic shift, the first jolt in a reconfigured world order driven by liberalism's most steadfast critics.
U.S. Vice President JD Vance delivered a blistering rebuke of NATO, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signaled a dramatic realignment of U.S. policy on Ukraine. New peace negotiations on Ukraine were announced in Munich and then launched in Saudi Arabia days later, but conspicuously absent were the Ukrainians and their European allies, with only the United States and Russia at the table.
The aftershocks of the conference reverberated across Europe, most notably in Germany, where the anti-European far-right Alternative for Germany party, the AfD – endorsed by Elon Musk and Vance – made history in the February election by becoming the country's second-largest political force.
This is a scenario that Pulitzer Prize-winning author and Atlantic staff writer Anne Applebaum long anticipated. In her 2021 Atlantic article "The Bad Guys Are Winning," Applebaum delivered a prescient warning: "If America removed the promotion of democracy from its foreign policy, autocracies would quickly take our place as the source of influence, funding, and ideas."
Celebrated for her works on the Soviet Gulag system and the Holodomor, the Soviet-made famine that devastated Ukraine in the early 1930s, Applebaum has chronicled the rise of Putin's Russia, the entrenchment of oligarchic power, and the global resurgence of authoritarianism. In recent years she has also focused on the MAGA movement that has weaponized propaganda to reshape America's politics and standing in the world.
Applebaum expanded her 2021 article into a book published last summer. "Autocracy Inc.: The Dictators Who Want to Run the World" explores the weakening of democratic institutions around the world amid a shifting landscape of threats. Rogue states and dictatorships are no longer tied together by ideology, as during the Cold War, but by powerful networks of criminal and mercenary interests often driven by Western corporations and technology.
Applebaum divides her time between Washington and Warsaw, from where she spoke to me on Zoom. Our conversation took place before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's tense meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump in March, but regardless of Washington's ultimate decision on Ukraine, the new administration has already made a profound impact on European governments and even the very concept of Europe.
"For 80 years, the United States built a set of alliances in Europe, Asia and elsewhere – including the alliance with Israel – based on shared values and the idea that working together serves mutual interests. These alliances enabled trade and created benefits for both sides," Applebaum says.
"Particularly in Europe and Asia, these alliances have been the foundation of peace, prosperity and stability. Now, [Trump] is pulling away from that. Even if he changes his mind about Ukraine or doesn't withdraw troops from NATO as threatened, something has already been broken. This is a big moment. I don't think it's possible to overstate how important it is."
In her study of autocrats and reactionary movements, Applebaum also closely examined Trump. She notes that his skepticism about Europe is nothing new; he has opposed the alliance since the '80s.
"In 1987, not long after a trip to Russia, he took out newspaper ads denouncing alliances as a waste of money. In one of his books, in 2000, Trump again criticized the European alliance as a waste of money. ... But during his first term, he was largely constrained," Applebaum says.
"He didn't understand how to use levers of power and was prevented from doing many of the things he wanted. Now, returning to power, he has surrounded himself with people who share his vision and are trying to carry it out."
Now, Applebaum argues, Europe is facing a crisis – one that many Europeans may not fully grasp.
"Unlike the U.S., Europe lacks centralized command-and-control systems and does not operate as a single entity in security matters. Economic and regulatory coordination exists, but security has long been outsourced to NATO," she says.
"This crisis has two main dimensions. The first is a security crisis: Does Europe have enough military hardware? Can it organize and coordinate its defense if the U.S. does not step in? Would it be capable of supporting Ukraine without American involvement?
"The answers remain unclear ... we'll see whether European nations can pledge enough resources – not just money but also a functional coalition. It would only take five countries pooling their efforts to create an effective security force.
They [Europe's far-right parties] like Israel because they like Jews who aren't living in their countries. Jews living in Israel – that's fine. But they don't want them in Germany, Hungary or wherever". Anne Applebaum
"The second challenge is technological. Europe must decide whether to allow U.S. technology to dominate its markets. This is not just an economic issue but a security one as well, given the invasive nature of modern surveillance technology. JD Vance delivered two speeches in Europe – one at an AI conference and another at the Munich Security Conference. At the AI event, he essentially told Europeans to step aside, as the United States would be leading in AI development.
"Europe now faces a critical choice. It may fall behind temporarily in cutting-edge technology, but it might also need to develop its own systems to maintain control over its security and sovereignty. The risks of allowing foreign dominance in technology are becoming increasingly clear."
Europe's internal threat
Applebaum has long been at the forefront of documenting Europe's transformations – both its struggles and its reinventions. Born in Washington, she developed an early fascination with Soviet history. After earning degrees from Yale and the London School of Economics, she moved to Warsaw to begin her journalism career as a correspondent for The Economist, covering the tensions sweeping the Eastern bloc.
Over the next few years, she chronicled the collapse of communist regimes for The Economist and The Independent, documenting the fragile rebirth of democracy across the region. In 1991, as the Soviet Union itself unraveled, she moved back to London, taking on editorial roles at The Spectator and later The Evening Standard.
Her first book, the travelogue "Between East and West: Across the Borderlands of Europe" (1994), captured the newly emerging states of the former Soviet empire. But her later deep dives into the machinery of totalitarianism cemented her reputation. "Gulag: A History" (2003), the result of years of research into the Soviet Union's vast system of forced labor camps, won the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction.
She followed with "Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe, 1944-1956," an account of Stalin's grip on the region and a finalist for a 2012 National Book Award. In 2017, Applebaum turned her lens on another devastating chapter of Soviet history with "Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine," an examination of the 1932-33 Ukrainian famine known as the Holodomor.
Having observed Europe's political shifts for the past 40 years, Applebaum sees the Continent's current fractures as a major concern. From Brexit to the rise of far-right movements and Hungary's tightening alignment with Russia despite its EU membership, the instability is only worsening.
"The real internal threat to Europe comes from pro-Russian and authoritarian-leaning forces competing for power in several countries," Applebaum says. "These groups were designed to weaken Europe's unity, and they succeed in doing just that."
The real internal threat to Europe comes from pro-Russian and authoritarian-leaning forces competing for power in several countries. These groups were designed to weaken Europe's unity, and they succeed in doing just that. Anne Applebaum
She says the growing momentum of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) and other far-right parties in Europe is fueled by U.S. firebrands like Elon Musk and Steve Bannon, including their physical gestures interpreted as Nazi salutes. It's all part of the new dynamic, with the right now in full power in the United States and providing a tailwind to its kindred spirits in Europe.
This is how it's going to be, Applebaum warns. "We're very close to Nazi salutes being something you must do to prove you're pro-Trump. They like breaking taboos, and this is the big one. I think you'll see more of it."
Antisemitism plays a central role for many of these taboo breakers, but organizations with antisemitic roots and beliefs can try to brush that label aside by declaring themselves pro-Israel.
"They like Israel because they like Jews who aren't living in their countries," Applebaum says. "Jews living in Israel – that's fine. But they don't want them in Germany, Hungary or wherever. The only political party in Europe that has run an openly antisemitic campaign in recent years is Fidesz in Hungary, which targeted George Soros."
She notes the good relations that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán maintains with his Israeli counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Netanyahu even chose Hungary for his second trip abroad since the International Criminal Court in the Hague issued an arrest warrant for him. His four day visit there that began on Wednesday, while Israel's military operations in Gaza are expanding and the Prime Minister's internal problems intensifying.
"These movements are alliances of different groups," Applebaum says of Fidesz and other parties that Netanyahu and his ministers are aligning themselves with. "There's a strong antisemitic streak in the anti-immigration movement and among identitarian groups that believe in the Great Replacement theory – the idea that Muslims or non-white populations are replacing white people, and that Jews are facilitating it. The Pittsburgh synagogue shooter, for example, was directly inspired by that conspiracy theory," Applebaum says about a 2018 terror attack.
"Of course, there are long-standing conspiracy theories about Jews – about money, secret control and hidden influence. Those ideas resurface periodically, and right now, antisemitism is rampant on Twitter (X). I barely use it anymore, but when I do, I see it constantly. It's an important component of this movement."
Elon Musk, 'classic oligarch'
Applebaum sees the right-wing takeover in the United States as driven by the oligarch class, much as in Putin's Russia – powerful figures using their wealth and influence to mold the political landscape in their favor.
"Musk is now a classic oligarch," Applebaum says. "He has both private and state power and is using state resources to enrich himself. He's taking control of government agencies that regulate his own businesses, where their relationship with the state benefits them financially."
Tactics like Musk's Department of Government Efficiency slashing the state are all too familiar to Applebaum. "There are some new aspects, but the core playbook remains the same – taking over the civil service and reshaping it so that people are loyal not to the Constitution but to a particular party or leader. That's the first step," she says.
"The second is taking control of regulatory agencies and politicizing them so they serve the interests of the ruling party or its allies. We've seen this pattern in Venezuela, Hungary, Turkey and Russia.
"These shifts don't usually happen without some level of crisis or conflict. Right now, we're at a moment where the refusal to accept court decisions is becoming murky – there are signs that some court orders may not be obeyed, but we don't yet know how that will unfold. If it escalates, that would be the next major crisis.
The one thing that does seem new is Musk's takeover of government computer systems, effectively making himself or his team the system administrators. It speeds up the process. What took Viktor Orbán years to accomplish could now be done in weeks". Anne Applebaum
"The one thing that does seem new – and I'm not aware of another precedent for this – is Musk's takeover of government computer systems, effectively making himself or his team the system administrators. That means they can alter code and access data directly.
"I don't know of anyone else who has done this. It appears to be an innovation in this playbook, but ultimately, it just speeds up the process. What took Viktor Orbán years to accomplish could now be done in weeks."
The new autocracies
Applebaum hasn't only tracked the decline of democracies, she has drawn a bead on the tactics, ideologies and leaders of the new autocracies – China, Turkey, Venezuela, North Korea and above all, Russia. She has examined how these regimes have expanded their influence over the West, exploiting its weaknesses and forging reciprocal relationships with Western governments that share overlapping interests.
"The Russians, in particular, have spent more than a decade pushing autocratic narratives in the U.S., Europe and possibly even in Israel," she says. "They've done so with clear objectives: destabilizing Europe, breaking up the European Union, and persuading the U.S. to withdraw troops from the Continent."
Another key message is about world politics – the idea that the United States' global role has ended and the world should embrace "multipolarity." But when Russia, China and Iran talk about multipolarity, they don't mean an equitable balance of power. They mean a world where big countries dictate terms and smaller countries simply have to comply. Applebaum sees this mirrored in American politics.
"We saw similar rhetoric used in Trump's last campaign and throughout the right-wing sphere in the U.S. These narratives align with what Russia has been pushing for years: getting the U.S. to withdraw from global leadership. … Whether that happens remains to be seen, but it aligns perfectly with Putin's long-term goals," Applebaum says.
"Putin wants a world where the U.S. no longer plays a special role and no longer promotes democracy, liberal values, transparency or accountability – because those are the ideas that threaten him the most. The one movement that truly challenged him ideologically was [Russian opposition leader] Alexei Navalny's anti-corruption campaign, which was rooted in rule of law, transparency and justice. If the U.S. abandons those principles, it's a huge victory for Putin."
Despite the notion that Western reactionary statements are merely copy-pasted from Russian troll farms, Applebaum sees a more complex dynamic – one where autocratic regimes and far-right movements in the West shape each other, creating a feedback loop that reinforces shared narratives and strategies.
"While Russia has long worked to shape American discourse, it has also taken cues from the U.S. For example, Putin's regime didn't initially focus on attacking transgender people, but they adopted that rhetoric after seeing its effectiveness in American politics". Anne Applebaum
"While Russia has long worked to shape American discourse, it has also taken cues from the U.S. For example, Putin's regime didn't initially focus on attacking transgender people, but they adopted that rhetoric after seeing its effectiveness in American politics," Applebaum says.
"So, rather than a one-way influence operation, there's a mutual exchange between these movements. But ultimately, Putin's overarching goal remains the same – undermining democracy and ensuring that the U.S. retreats from the world stage."
Lessons from Poland
Applebaum is deeply immersed in Polish politics, not only as a writer but also through her marriage to Radosław Sikorski, Poland's foreign minister. Poland stands as a rare case in Europe where a liberal society successfully pushed back after eight years under an illiberal government. In a time when many countries are retreating into nationalism and authoritarianism, Applebaum explains the factors that made Poland an exception.
"When a government weakens judicial independence and controls journalism, large-scale corruption often follows," she says. "In Poland, this became so blatant that the opposition was able to run a strong anti-corruption campaign, and people could clearly see the unfairness of the system.
"Another factor was public backlash against unpopular policies, particularly the tightening of Poland's already strict abortion laws, which led to tragic consequences and further eroded support.
"The opposition was able to offer a vision that reassured people about Poland's future in Europe, and that ultimately helped them win. Not every lesson from Poland applies universally, but some key takeaways stand out. Opposition unity is crucial, exposing corruption can be an effective strategy, and offering a hopeful, forward-looking vision can resonate with voters, especially when people fear international isolation."
Applebaum says that while Trump's administration isn't exactly like others and the United States has a different political system, there could still be similarities in the regimes' belligerence.
"It's entirely possible that the level of corruption we're about to see – along with the consolidation of power by oligarchs like Musk – will be deeply unpopular. And this is already happening. ... It's also possible that Trump's aggressive and predatory foreign policy will turn people against him," Applebaum says.
"Most Americans don't want to invade Greenland, for example. Sure, maybe a few people on the internet do, but it's not exactly a mainstream position. When Trump floated the idea of building beachfront hotels in Gaza, it wasn't popular – even among the far right, which generally doesn't support spending American money on projects like that."
Beyond the policies and rhetoric, Applebaum is keeping an eye on how liberal people respond to the onslaught.
"A big question is whether people still react as strongly to real-life consequences as they do to online outrage. Does it matter more that your air is polluted and your water isn't safe, or does it matter more that someone online is making you angry?" Anne Applebaum
"A big question, one that's just as relevant in Israel as it is in the U.S., is whether people still react as strongly to real-life consequences as they do to online outrage. Does it matter more that your air is polluted and your water isn't safe, or does it matter more that someone online is making you angry?" Applebaum asks.
"Elon Musk is betting that people care more about what happens online – the narrative he can shape, both personally and through algorithms, amplified by millions of anonymous accounts with blue check marks. He's gambling that this digital reality is more powerful than real life. Whether that turns out to be true, we'll see."
Etan Nechin