From the Desk

Several patterns continued to shape antisemitic activity during July 2026 across physical space, online environments, and attacks on Jewish symbols. While Jewish institutions remained frequent targets, many incidents also unfolded in ordinary public settings after individuals were recognized as Jewish or Israeli. Streets, tourist sites, parks, restaurants, and other shared public spaces appeared alongside synagogues and community institutions as recurring locations for antisemitic harassment and violence.

At the same time, antisemitic incidents continued to target symbols associated with Jewish religion, historical memory, and collective identity. Torah scrolls, Jewish cemeteries, and Holocaust imagery appeared in different countries and under different circumstances, while online monitoring identified visual content, conspiracy narratives, and messaging that attached longstanding antisemitic themes to contemporary geopolitical developments.

International data published during July documented the broader scope of these developments. The second annual report of the J7 Large Communities’ Task Force Against Antisemitism recorded more than 23,000 antisemitic incidents across the seven largest Jewish diaspora communities during 2025, describing it as the deadliest year for Jews outside Israel since 1994. During the same period, Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs reported an unprecedented number of requests for assistance from Israelis affected by antisemitic incidents while traveling abroad.

The incidents recorded during July show that antisemitism continues to appear across multiple environments simultaneously. The same patterns appeared across physical attacks, symbolic acts, and online discourse, extending beyond Jewish institutions into the ordinary settings of everyday Jewish life.

Dr. Liram Koblentz-Stenzler
Head of the Antisemitism & Extremism Desk
International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT)

Key Trends | July 2026

Trend 1. Everyday Public Spaces as Targets of Antisemitic Violence

Physical assaults against Jews and Israelis in July increasingly unfolded in ordinary public settings rather than at specifically Jewish institutions. Incidents were reported in city streets, parks, tourist sites, campsites, restaurants, and other shared public spaces across Europe and North America.

In Barcelona, a group of French Jews was chased through the city for nearly ninety minutes after leaving Friday evening prayers, while attackers shouted antisemitic and anti-Israel slogans. In Montreal, several Orthodox Jewish men were assaulted and robbed while returning from synagogue. Israeli tourists were violently attacked in both Montenegro and Mongolia after being identified as Israelis, while in Manhattan at least one visibly Jewish man was among the victims of a stabbing attack.

The incidents occurred in different countries, involved different perpetrators, and unfolded under unrelated circumstances. Yet they increasingly took place in spaces that are part of everyday public life rather than locations specifically associated with Jewish communal activity. Public space itself is becoming a more frequent setting for antisemitic violence.

Trend 2. Jewish identity as the immediate trigger for violence

Across many of July’s incidents, victims were selected because they were identifiable as Jewish or Israeli rather than because of their actions or involvement in a particular event.

Attackers targeted Orthodox Jews wearing traditional dress in Montreal, Israeli tourists after hearing them speak Hebrew in Mongolia and Montenegro, rabbis in Vilnius, and visibly Jewish individuals in New York. In several cases, the incident began immediately after the victims were recognized as Jewish or Israeli, without any prior confrontation.

Language, religious appearance, or national identity repeatedly served as the basis for victim selection. Recognition alone was often enough to trigger harassment or violence.

Trend 3. Symbolic targeting of Jewish identity and memory

Several incidents in July targeted symbols associated with Jewish identity, religion, and historical memory rather than individuals alone. Across different countries and contexts, the symbolic significance of the target often appeared to outweigh its practical or financial value.

Near Paris, twelve Torah scrolls were stolen from a synagogue while other valuables were reportedly left behind, indicating that religious objects themselves may have been the intended target. In Stockholm, demonstrators displayed a replica of the entrance gate to Auschwitz, replacing the words “Arbeit Macht Frei” with the word “Gaza.” Representatives of the Jewish community and Israel’s ambassador to Sweden condemned the display as a trivialization of the Holocaust and a misuse of one of its most recognizable symbols.

Although the incidents differed in location and context, they shared a focus on symbols representing Jewish religion, history, and collective memory.

Key Incident | The Pursuit of French Jewish Visitors in Barcelona

On 4 July 2026, a group of French Jewish visitors was pursued through the streets of central Barcelona for nearly ninety minutes after leaving Friday evening prayers at a synagogue in the city’s Eixample district. According to members of the group, dozens of individuals followed them through several streets while shouting antisemitic and anti-Israel slogans, including “Baby killers” and “Jews are not welcome here.” Fearing further violence, members of the group repeatedly sought shelter in nearby shops and businesses while attempting to evade the crowd.

The incident was reported to the Mossos d’Esquadra, Catalonia’s regional police force, which opened an investigation. Representatives of Barcelona’s Jewish community condemned the attack and expressed concern over the safety of visibly Jewish residents and visitors. The incident received widespread attention in Spain, France, and Israel, prompting renewed discussion about antisemitic incidents targeting Jewish tourists in Europe.

Unlike attacks directed at synagogues or other Jewish institutions, the pursuit unfolded after the group had left the synagogue and entered the ordinary flow of city life. The victims were not attending a demonstration or public gathering. They had simply left Friday evening prayers and were walking through one of Europe’s most visited cities. Once they were identified as Jewish, the streets themselves became part of the attack.

Campus Environments and the Normalization of Antisemitism

July’s campus-related developments highlighted two parallel trends: continued institutional adoption of formal antisemitism policies, alongside growing disagreement over how those policies should be assessed.

At the institutional level, universities in the United States and Australia continued to formalize their responses to antisemitism. The University of Pittsburgh announced a series of measures following the recommendations of its Working Group on Antisemitism, committing to strengthen reporting mechanisms, expand training, improve complaint procedures, and implement additional initiatives aimed at improving the campus environment for Jewish students, faculty, and staff. In Australia, a new national anti-racism standard required universities to adopt formal policies addressing antisemitism alongside other forms of racism, while the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion devoted part of its public hearings to university governance and the experiences of Jewish students and staff. In both countries, universities are moving from informal practice toward binding institutional policy on antisemitism.

That picture became more complicated at Harvard, where the question of how institutional progress should be evaluated became a source of division rather than consensus. On 22 July, Hillel International filed an amicus brief supporting Harvard in its legal dispute with the federal government over frozen research funding, arguing that the university’s campus climate had “meaningfully improved” and that further funding cuts would ultimately harm Jewish students. Within twenty-four hours, Hillel withdrew the filing, stating that it had been submitted before completing its internal review process. The withdrawal drew criticism from Jewish organizations and advocates who argued that the original brief understated the continuing challenges facing Jewish students, while Harvard Hillel clarified that it had played no role in either the filing or its withdrawal.

July’s campus developments suggest that the debate is shifting. Universities continue to adopt formal antisemitism policies, but there is less agreement over when those measures should be regarded as sufficient.

Online Dynamics | July 2026

Trend 1. Visual content continued to serve as a primary vehicle for antisemitic messaging

Across X, Instagram, and Telegram, antisemitic narratives frequently appeared through memes, manipulated images, and visual satire rather than lengthy ideological argumentation. Monitored content portrayed Israel and Israeli leaders through exaggerated caricatures, dehumanizing imagery, and symbolic representations designed to reinforce accusations of manipulation, exploitation, or collective guilt.

Trend 2: Violence continued to be framed as legitimate resistance

Across Telegram, X, and pro-Hamas online channels, monitored content continued to normalize or justify violence against Israelis through recurring slogans, martyrdom narratives, and messaging portraying armed attacks as legitimate resistance. Posts frequently incorporated hashtags, symbolic imagery, and emotionally charged language that framed violence as both justified and inevitable rather than exceptional.

Trend 3: Geopolitical events continued to trigger antisemitic conspiracy narratives

Across X, Telegram, and Instagram, monitoring identified repeated attempts to reinterpret international political developments through longstanding antisemitic conspiracy narratives. Discussions surrounding diplomatic tensions involving Spain and Morocco, alongside other regional developments, were repeatedly framed as evidence of hidden Israeli or Jewish influence over foreign governments. Rather than focusing solely on Israel itself, monitored content increasingly portrayed unrelated geopolitical events as orchestrated by Jewish actors or carried out on Israel’s behalf.

By attaching familiar conspiratorial narratives to new international developments, online actors continued to adapt classic antisemitic themes to contemporary events, extending their relevance beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Responses and Regulatory Developments | July 2026

July produced a series of governmental and law-enforcement responses to antisemitism, centered largely in the United Kingdom.

In the United Kingdom, authorities designated the Islamic Movement of Companions of the Right (IMCR) as a national security threat under the new National Security (State Threats) Act 2026 on 14 July, after concluding the group had been linked to a series of antisemitic attacks and plots targeting Jewish communities; supporting or assisting the organization became a criminal offence.

Later in the month, Greater Manchester Police publicly acknowledged that investigators had missed an opportunity that may have prompted further action before the 2025 terrorist attack on Heaton Park Synagogue. On 23 July, Chief Constable Sir Stephen Watson issued a public apology to the Jewish community and the families affected, following the discovery that mobile phones seized during earlier investigations had not been examined before the attack. The Independent Office for Police Conduct continues to investigate.

Recent Analysis from the Desk

At the Contemporary Antisemitism 2026 conference at the University of Haifa, Dr. Liram Koblentz-Stenzler presented “Deniable by Design: A Drift Model of Antisemitic Meaning in Digital Discourse”. The presentation examined how antisemitic meaning develops through gradual semantic shifts and was later reported by Jewish News Syndicate (JNS).

Read here