Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Lorna Fitzsimons

GET UPDATES FROM Lorna Fitzsimons
 

Ed Miliband Needs to Seize This Teachable Moment

Posted: 07/12/11 11:27 GMT

Anti-Semitism is racism plain and simple. There would be outrage, and quite rightly so, if anyone said a British born Muslim could not be trusted to serve loyally as an ambassador to a Muslim country. We did not question Francis Campbell, the first Catholic to be appointed ambassador to the Holy See. So why is it acceptable to question the loyalty of the Jew but not the Muslim or the Catholic? Where are our antennae about this kind of anti-Semitism? Where is our moral clarity?

Paul Flynn is not an anti-Semite. But his recent remarks, about the British Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, gave expression, surely inadvertently, to a very old anti-Semitic idea: the eternally 'divided loyalty of the Jew.'

At the Public Administration Select Committee on 30 November, Flynn complained that "the ambassador has proclaimed himself to be a Zionist" and then raised doubts about Mr Gould's loyalty. Flynn then compounded the problem by telling the Jewish Chronicle that Britain needed "someone with roots in the UK [who] can't be accused of having Jewish loyalty."

Today, Flynn has apologised and withdrawn his remarks, following a meeting held last Friday with the Chief Whip. "I greatly regret the interpretation that has been placed on them and I fully understand why offence was given...There is no reason that anyone of any race or religion should be debarred from public office."

Good. In the past Jews were depicted a 'rootless cosmopolitans' loyal to the wandering tribe and not the nation in which they would never be more than an interloper. In the present Jews are depicted as the 'Zionist' or part of the 'Israel lobby,' loyal to Israel not the nation in which he or she is, once again, no more than an interloper.

This is not a left-right issue. The Conservative MP Robert Halfon said "Mr Flynn's actions betray an extraordinary mindset on the left, that allows normally highly intelligent and engaging individuals to lose all sense of proportion when the word 'Israel' is mentioned" said the. The hard-left pro-Palestinian campaigner Owen Jones was equally outraged at the encouragement for anti-Semitism Flynn's tirade had encouraged.

Jenni Frazer noted at the Jewish Chronicle that 'Flynn has now brought this attitude into respectable conversation.' In truth the attitude has been there for a while. Back in 2002 the New Statesman cover featured a gold Star of David impaling the Union Jack and the words 'A kosher conspiracy?...Britain's pro-Israel lobby.' As the online journal Engage has pointed out the message was 'What about these Jews, whose classic apart-ness, epitomized by their dietary habits (keeping kosher), pits their own self-interest over that of the supine UK (graphically portrayed as if it were a recumbent trophy base)?'

Usually, when this kind of anti-Semitism raises its head the left sobers up and apologises. Back in 2002 the editor of the NS Peter Wilby admitted he had 'gotten it wrong' because '(t)he cover ... used images and words in such a way as to create unwittingly the impression that the New Statesman was following an anti-Semitic tradition that sees Jews as a conspiracy piercing the heart of the nation.'

But the dual loyalty slur is still with us, as Flynn's comments showed. In fact with the publication in 2007 of John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M Walt's flawed but deeply influential book The Israel Lobby it has taken on a new respectability.

And that is why the absence of an on-the-record condemnation of Flynn's remarks by Labour Party leader Ed Miliband has drawn a rebuke from Jenni Frazer blogging at the Jewish Chronicle: "I have rarely felt such a sense of disappointment in a Labour leader as I do today in Ed Miliband."

In fact the Labour leader spoke powerfully to the recent Labour Friends of Israel dinner about his commitment to the state of Israel;

I wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the State of Israel and what it has achieved, and I wanted to make that clear. I'm grateful to Israel, I respect Israel, I admire Israel and that is why I'm proud to be here to be here, to be part of Labour Friends of Israel. And I give you my word that under my leadership I will ensure that the Labour Party remains a strong and steadfast friend of Israel.

Because he went on to express his absolute commitment to the two state solution and his vision of 'Israel and Palestine living side by side; and with each enjoying self-determination and mutual recognition" this eloquent and intelligent Labour Leader now can restore moral clarity to the debate by not just condemning, but by using his bully-pulpit to educate. This is what President Obama called a 'teachable moment.' Ed should seize it.

 
Anti-Semitism is racism plain and simple. There would be outrage, and quite rightly so, if anyone said a British born Muslim could not be trusted to serve loyally as an ambassador to a Muslim country.
Anti-Semitism is racism plain and simple. There would be outrage, and quite rightly so, if anyone said a British born Muslim could not be trusted to serve loyally as an ambassador to a Muslim country.
 
 
  • Comments
  • 10
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:37 PM on 12/08/2011
Theres an old saying about, "protesting too much" springs to mind here, theres another one, "no smoke without fire" which also applies, and whether or not either is correct, political bias towards Israel and the fact any disagreement with that bias is seen as anti-semitic or, as jewish contributors on this board label any with opposing views "jewhater" simply does more to prove the political leanings or affiliation to this sect by "our" parliamentarians is a lot more clandestine than it appears. In fact you don't have to research very deeply to find over-representation of the sect holding seats in the house, coincidence or collusion, ulterior motives, take your pick.
08:36 PM on 12/07/2011
This is not the first time that a British Ambassador's religion has been raised as an impediment to them doing their job. Campbell's appointment was raised in Parliament where the then Foreign Secretary had to answer questions on whether Campbell was a British Citizen and if the government had sought assurances from him regarding his views on the supremacy of UK civil law over canon law. Sadly for some MPs in our midst, it is not sufficient that a citizen enjoys the same rights as every other citizen, but some clearly believe that we need to reintroduce some form of Test Act. Deja vu nineteenth century: Perhaps the next step will be a call for the repeal of some of the parliamentary legislation which liberated Catholics and Jews from some of these historic suspicions.
06:58 PM on 12/07/2011
"There would be outrage, and quite rightly so, if anyone said a British born Muslim could not be trusted to serve loyally as an ambassador to a Muslim country... Flynn complained that 'the ambassador has proclaimed himself to be a Zionist' and then raised doubts about Mr Gould's loyalty. "

I don't think the MP said the right thing, but you are making a false equivalence here. Don't you think people would question the loyalty of a British Ambassador who is Muslim if they also declared themself a "Jihadist"?

If Matthew Gould has declared himself a Zionist, that is publicly adopting a political position that may or may not be on conflict with his role as a representative of the government of the UK. THAT is an appropriate basis on which to question his motives, but simply the fact of whether or not he is Jewish is NOT a legitimate basis. Just like it would be appriate to question someone who declared themself a "jihadist," but not simply for being Muslim or not.

Any critisism of Matthew Gould based on his status as a Jew, however, is repugnant and should not be tolerated.
This comment has been removed.
11:05 PM on 12/07/2011
Correct - he might just as well have claimed that Israeli President Chaim Herzog had " divided loyalties " between Israel and the UK as he was born in Belfast, served in the British Forces and was originally a UK citizen - has Mr Flynnn divided loyalties because of his Irish family origins -it was simply a very unwise statement particularly in view of the fact his Party Leader Ed Milliband is himself Jewish - is he suggesting he has " divided loyalties "