Vox brings back Fernando Paz, historian accused of Holocaust denial

Vox rescues Fernando Paz, the historian who questioned the Nuremberg trials

What leads a party to bring back a public figure it once had to distance itself from over controversial statements? That is the question hanging over Vox's recent decision to promote historian Fernando Paz again, whom the party removed as its congressional candidate for Albacete in 2019 after it emerged that he questioned the Nuremberg trials and defended conversion therapy for lgtb people. Now, according to El País, Paz has been reinstated in the party's official channels: he took part in the youth campus of Vox's European family, is listed as a lecturer at a training school linked to the party, and since December has been an honorary board member of a Spanish nationalist organisation co-founded by Santiago Abascal.

A record back in the spotlight

Spain's Jewish community had already accused Paz of Holocaust denial. His return has not gone unnoticed: while some celebrate it as a way to "debunk historical hoaxes", others point out that the party itself pushed him aside barely five years ago. The controversy is fuelled by parallel data: it has been noted that the Gallardón law of 2015 granted Spanish nationality to more than 72,000 descendants of Sephardic Jews, a process that closed in October 2019 with over 153,000 applications. Some use this figure to argue that criticism of Paz is selective, though the debate quickly descends into personal attacks and insults.

The contradictions in the story

The curious thing is that among those defending Paz, some claim the party they vote for is "owned by Israel and American Jews", a contradiction that apparently bothers no one. Others flatly deny that Paz is antisemitic or a Holocaust denier, despite the documented accusations. Meanwhile, critics lament that Vox is once again embracing someone who should be a liability, not an asset.

Fernando Paz's return is, in short, a play aimed at Vox's most ideological base. But the move carries risks: it revives a profile that already cost the party votes and clashes with the moderation some factions within it are calling for. We shall see whether the glue holds this time or whether, as in 2019, it ends up disintegrating into contradictions.