Why do some publics engage deeply with distant conflicts absent direct ethnic or strategic ties? Existing explanations emphasise geopolitical ties, demographics, or elite cues, but these cannot account for the Republic of Ireland’s consistent pro-Palestinian stance, exceptional in Western Europe and central in shaping Irish state behaviour, international coalitions, and bilateral relations. We argue that historical narratives – particularly those rooted in anticolonial struggle – provide cognitive and affective mechanisms that shape public attitudes to foreign conflict. Using novel survey measures and open questions on a representative sample of Irish respondents (1547), we find that sympathy for Palestinians is broad-based, deeply held, and closely tied to perceptions of Irish historical oppression and unity. These results hold after accounting for ideology and party cues. Given its prominence in public debate, we also test antisemitism as an explanation. We find low levels of antisemitism and higher levels of Islamophobia, indicating that general pro-Palestinian sympathy is driven neither by prejudice toward Jews nor particular affinity toward Muslims. Open-ended responses show Irish respondents spontaneously draw analogies between Ireland’s colonial past and the Palestinian experience. Our findings highlight the long shadow of national history in shaping contemporary foreign policy attitudes.
Canavan et al. (Sat,) studied this question.