From the West Bank to global far-right violence: what’s driving the new cycle of instability?

A new report from Spain’s Observatorio Internacional de Estudios sobre Terrorismo (OIET), backed by the Colectivo de Víctimas del Terrorismo (Covite), argues that extreme-right threats and violence are rising and spreading across more countries. The article states that during 2025 there were 190 incidents attributed to far-right actors, framed as a widening pattern rather than isolated episodes. In parallel, a separate commentary by Nimrod Novik highlights a deadly escalation in the West Bank, claiming that since the Hamas attacks in 2023, hundreds of Palestinians have died at the hands of settlers or Israeli soldiers. The piece describes an emerging “cycle of terror and subjugation,” linking ongoing violence to a broader breakdown in restraint and accountability. Geopolitically, the cluster points to two reinforcing dynamics: transnational radicalization on the far-right and localized, protracted violence in the Israeli-Palestinian arena. The far-right trend suggests a diffusion of tactics, narratives, and recruitment channels that can strain social cohesion, complicate policing, and raise the risk of copycat attacks in multiple jurisdictions. In the West Bank framing, the key power dynamic is the interaction between Israeli security forces and settler violence, with Hamas positioned as the originating shock after 2023. The immediate beneficiaries of continued violence are actors that profit from polarization and weakened governance, while the losers are civilians, moderate political space, and any diplomatic pathway that requires credible de-escalation. Market and economic implications are indirect but potentially material through risk premia and policy responses. If far-right violence expands, governments may tighten security spending, increase compliance and insurance costs, and elevate volatility in sectors sensitive to public-order disruptions such as logistics, event security, and private security services. In the West Bank context, sustained violence typically pressures regional risk sentiment, can disrupt movement and trade flows, and may feed into higher insurance and shipping costs for Middle East-linked routes, even when the articles do not cite specific price moves. For investors, the main transmission mechanism is likely through higher geopolitical risk pricing, potential sanctions or enforcement actions, and a broader deterioration in regional stability assumptions. What to watch next is whether these narratives translate into measurable operational changes: more incidents, more cross-border coordination claims, and any escalation in West Bank casualties or security-force posture. Key indicators include official incident counts and judicial outcomes for far-right cases, plus any policy statements that signal tougher counter-extremism enforcement or, conversely, political backlash. For the West Bank, monitor indicators of settler-security force interaction, changes in rules of engagement, and any credible mediation efforts that could interrupt the “cycle” described by Novik. The trigger points for escalation are sustained civilian harm, retaliatory attacks, and any breakdown in restraint; de-escalation would be signaled by verified reductions in violence and credible accountability measures.

Geopolitical Implications

• 01

  Transnational far-right violence narratives can accelerate radicalization and complicate domestic security across Europe.

• 02

  Alleged settler-security force dynamics in the West Bank risk entrenching a long-running cycle that undermines de-escalation.

• 03

  Polarization reduces diplomatic space and increases the probability of sustained instability.

Key Signals

• —Changes in official far-right incident counts and prosecution outcomes.
• —Documented shifts in West Bank security posture and settler-related violence metrics.
• —Evidence of retaliation and sustained civilian harm.
• —Security spending guidance and insurance underwriting adjustments.