Nazism, communism and radical Islamism may differ in their ideologies, but their totalitarian expressions share a dangerous conviction: individual freedom must give way to an overriding cause, dissent must be silenced, and violence can be justified in pursuit of a supposedly higher goal.
Europe has learned, at an enormous human cost, what happens when extremist ideologies are allowed to flourish. The horrors of the twentieth century should serve as a permanent warning. Yet today, we face another challenge that we cannot afford to underestimate: political Islamism and the networks that seek to undermine our democratic values.
Our response must be unequivocal. We must defend democracy, protect human dignity and confront extremism wherever it appears.
But there is an uncomfortable question Europe must answer: how can we be certain that European taxpayers’ money is not supporting organisations whose activities contradict the very values the European Union was founded to defend?
A Long-Overdue Wake-Up Call
On 8 October 2026, the European Parliament adopted a resolution addressing Islamist entryism and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood network. The resolution calls for a stronger European response, closer scrutiny of EU funding and more effective safeguards against efforts by extremist networks to undermine European institutions.
The resolution received 381 votes in favour, 167 against and 15 abstentions.
This is an important political signal. It shows that concerns about Islamist influence and the use of European funding can no longer simply be brushed aside. However, passing a resolution is only the beginning. What matters is whether European institutions are prepared to follow through with concrete action.
When Good Intentions Are Not Enough
The problem is not necessarily that European institutions deliberately set out to finance extremism. It is that funding programmes designed to support legitimate goals can become vulnerable when scrutiny is inadequate.
Education, humanitarian assistance, youth engagement, initiatives against discrimination and intercultural dialogue are all worthwhile objectives. They deserve European support. But a worthwhile objective is not, by itself, proof that every organisation seeking public funding deserves it.
Questions have been raised about the ideological or institutional affiliations of several organisations that have received European funding, including FEMYSO, the Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations, and Islamic Relief Worldwide. FEMYSO acknowledges European institutional funding, while the Commission has confirmed past EU humanitarian funding for Islamic Relief Worldwide. Both organisations reject alleged links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
These concerns warrant careful and transparent examination. They must also be distinguished from established findings of misconduct. Receiving public funding and facing allegations does not, in itself, establish that an organisation has promoted or financed extremism.
One particularly controversial example was the European Islamophobia Report 2018, associated with the Turkish think tank SETA. In parliamentary questions, critics challenged its treatment of journalists, writers and politicians and questioned whether it stigmatised legitimate expression. The Commission confirmed EU support for the project through a programme managed by Turkish authorities, while stating that it had not selected the project and did not endorse the report’s contents.
Such cases raise broader questions about how funding applications are assessed, potential ideological affiliations are examined and the actual use of public money is monitored, including when funds are administered through intermediary authorities.
Fighting Extremism Must Never Mean Targeting Ordinary Muslims
There is an important distinction that must not be lost in this debate. Islam is a religion practised peacefully by millions of Europeans. Political Islamism seeks to organise public life according to a political interpretation of religion, which, particularly in its extremist forms, may conflict with democratic freedoms.
Criticism of radical Islamist movements is not an attack on Muslims. Nor should protecting Muslim citizens from discrimination prevent democratic societies from challenging organisations that promote intolerance, antisemitism or political violence. Parliament’s resolution itself stresses that political Islamism must not be treated as synonymous with Islam.
Many Muslims are themselves opponents of Islamist extremism. Europe must be capable of defending religious freedom and confronting political extremism at the same time.
European Taxpayers Deserve Stronger Safeguards
The European Union funds civil society organisations, research institutions and humanitarian projects. With that support comes an obligation to ensure that recipients comply with funding conditions and respect the fundamental values of the Union.
EU safeguards already exist, including the Commission’s Early Detection and Exclusion System, which allows exclusion from funding on specified grounds, including incitement to violence, hatred or discrimination. Those safeguards must be applied effectively and strengthened where necessary.
Relying on an organisation’s own declarations is not enough. Funding decisions need appropriate due diligence, transparent reporting, independent scrutiny and effective mechanisms for responding when credible concerns arise.
This is not simply a question of protecting public finances. It is about maintaining trust in European institutions and ensuring that our money serves the purposes for which it was intended. We cannot demand accountability from governments and businesses while accepting weaker standards from organisations that receive European grants.
A Resolution Cannot Be the End of the Story
The European Parliament has taken a step towards addressing these concerns. Now the European Commission must demonstrate that it is willing to act.
We need clearer funding criteria, stronger checks on recipients, greater transparency and effective consequences where misuse or serious violations are established.
There is nothing discriminatory about insisting that European funds must not support christianophobia, antisemitism, terrorism, the glorification of violence or efforts to undermine fundamental rights. These principles should apply consistently, regardless of the political or religious ideology involved.
Europe cannot credibly defend democracy abroad while failing to safeguard its own public funding at home. Not a single cent of European taxpayers’ money should go to organisations proven to promote or support Islamist extremism.
This should not be a controversial demand. It should be a basic principle of responsible governance.
The October resolution must therefore mark the beginning of a more serious European effort, not the end of the debate. Europe must know where its money goes, who receives it and what it ultimately supports. Our democratic values deserve nothing less.
