CORBYN’S ANTI - SEMITISM CONTROVERSY DISRUPTS BRITAIN’S BREXIT ELECTION

The tiny Jewish population of the United Kingdom representing only 0.5 percent of the citizenry has become front and center in the midst of the crucial Brexit election. Jeremy Corbyn the Labour Party leader’s association with anti - semitism has catapulted the nation into a major fracas. While the immediate trigger for the uproar was the unprecedented attack by the Chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom on the Labour Party and particularly its leader, the matter has been simmering in the public arena for years. Eighteen months ago seven Labour MP’s resigned over the question of anti semitism in the Party, while sixty parliamentarians joined a protest. Even if all the Jewish voters were to heed the warning of the formerly apolitical Chief Rabbi Mirvis, as to “What will become of Jews if Labour Wins The Election?”, they  cannot have any meaningful numerical impact on the outcome. Nevertheless the outcry evoked by the Rabbi might alter the course.

LINGERING LABOUR ANTI - SEMITIC CRISIS OVERSHADOWING ELECTION AND BREXIT CRISIS 

The crisis must also be evaluated in the light of the smears of racism against Boris Johnson, the increase of anti - semitism in Europe generally, the wide spread support that the Chief Rabbi has garnered and in the wake of the carefully worded warnings on the growth of manifestations of hatred of Jews both in the UK and Europe by the internationally respected theologian and philosopher, former Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks. Three further Labour law makers have recently resigned over this controversy within the past few months, the most recent being Tom Watson the number two in the Party.

The whole rumpus over anti semitism is obscuring the very reason that Boris Johnson called the early election, namely to resolve the Brexit impasse. The newly elected Conservative Party leader had high hopes that he would gain a clear cut majority to just get the hell out of Europe come hell or high water. So he has greeted Corbyn’s discomfort with undisguised glee. He has trumpeted the fact that he is a great friend of the Jews while in the same breath announcing that Islamophobia is justified!  Corbyn had been generally regarded as a moderating influence on Johnson’s “hard Brexit”. The one party that could potentially detract from a large Conservative majority is the Liberal Democratic Party but currently it is in a shambles.

The electorate in general has been thrown into no man’s land. Their problem has been magnified in that Labour now represents the hard left and the Conservatives the hard right, both parties having been purged of their moderates. So those voters who oppose discrimination of any sort cannot vote for either major party thereby forfeiting having an influence on the future of the country’s relationship with Europe. Those who believe that Brexit overrides all issues will hold their noses and vote their choice. Of course there are smaller parties and many are looking to the weak middle of the road Liberal Democratic Party to register their frustration and anger. 

CHIEF RABBI’S PROTEST TO WHICH CORBYN OBJECTED

The despairing political statement by the decidedly apolitical Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, shocked the British body politic. The cleric did not mince his words, in his much publicized declaration he claimed that  “…. a new poison, sanctioned from the very top has taken root in the Labour Party (where the Jews) are treated by many as an irritant as opposed to a minority community with genuine concerns. It is not my place (to tell) anyone how to vote. I regret being in this situation at all. I simply pose this question: what will the election result show about the moral compass of our country? What will become of Jews if Labour wins?”

Dolefully the leader of the UK Hebrew faith opined that elections should be a celebration of democracy. He continued that the majority of British Jews, just a few weeks before the forthcoming electoral contest, “were gripped” by anxiety. Lest there be any hope for comfort Ephraim Mirvis underlined that the fear was “justified”. The bottom line was, “… the very soul of our nation was at stake…. (Corbyn) was unfit for high office”. 

 Following this clearcut outspoken denouement of the years’ long agonizing dialogue between society and the Labour Party, where inter alia there was a perceived failure of Labour to act against the anti semitism sentiment and behavior within their party, everything cried out for a conciliatory reassuring rejoinder from the Labour Party Leader. This was not about to happen. 

The fact that the would be Prime Minister was given the opportunity on four occasions, by the British Broadcasting Corporation interviewer to apologize for the Labour position and refused, could not have gained him the support of any waverers. His irritation at even being questioned came through when he had to be asked again and again whether he thought it was anti semitic to opine that the Rothschild family runs Israel and global government. Finally, after “sidestepping” the enquiry he commented that it was an old anti semitic trope.  Corbyn’s behavior was reminiscent of his seething anger during the House of Commons debate on anti semitism within his party over a year ago. Jeremy Corbyn reinforced his claim that he had done more than anyone else to rid his Party of anti - semitism. He took the highest exception to the current Chief Rabbi’s response to the assertion that he had investigated every case of anti semitism amongst the Labour Party members as “mendacious fiction". 

Corbyn’s litany of actions that have offended Jewish sensibilities are endless and still linger out there, not having been convincingly rebutted. They range from calling Hamas and Hezbollah “friends”, attending memorial services for Black September terrorists that murdered Israeli athletes in 2011 as well as laying a wreath on the grave of the PLO leader who planned the attack, not objecting to a grotesque mural which crudely depicted Jews with hooked noses in scenes from the infamous fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion and more.

It would appear that Corbyn “doesn’t get it”. He would have done well to have listened to Lord Sack’s intervention both in the House of Lords and his invitational address to the European Union as to the manifestations of anti semitism in the twenty - first century. Former Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks maintained that anti semites rarely acknowledge that they are anti  semitic - rather they have other rationalizations for their discriminatory behavior. Corbyn has only himself to blame for letting the anti semitism accusations simmer. Even if he genuinely believed that he had answered the criticisms, he needed to meet this devastating charge of racism against him and his Party. While Corbyn has support to his claim including from a number of Jews, the overwhelming consensus of those that matter don’t believe him. 

What has to overhang this whole tragic debate is that there had to have been extensive thought and consultation preceding the unambiguous condemnation of the Leader of one of the two major British political parties and a possible Prime Minister.

SUPPORT FOR CHIEF RABBI MIRVIS

The religious community of the United Kingdom have publicly come out on the side of Rabbi Mirvis. Most notably the leader of the English Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, made it clear where he and the Church stood by tweeting, “…That the Chief Rabbi should be compelled to make such an unprecedented statement at this time ought to alert us to the deep sense of insecurity and fear felt by many British Jews”. The Muslim Council of Britain called anti - semitism in politics unacceptable while condemning the Islamophobia which is rife across the spectrum. The United Kingdom Hindu Party echoed Mirvis’s criticism adding that, the Labour Party had become racist under Corbyn. The Sikh viewpoint was articulated by Lord Singh who pointed out that discrimination was directed to other minorities as well. 

The letters to editors as has social media been replete with comments on this controversy both for and against Corbyn’s position. However the majority seem to be empathetic to Mirvis’s indignation. Particularly significant was a strong statement from a diverse group of artists, writers, intellectuals, notables and historians who urged Britains to vote against Labour in the forthcoming election. Inter alia they argued “…the prospect of a prime minister steeped in association with anti semitism… Mr. Corbyn has a long record of embracing antisemites as colleagues”. To add to the Labour Party woes they are being investigated by the country’s Equality and Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against the Jews. 

In fairness to Corbyn and his party there are those that believe that the Labour Party has done everything possible to cleanse itself of anti semitism but they have an uphill battle against the record.

BEHIND MODERN DAY ANTI SEMITISM

Before proceeding Jay H. Ell would like to make a full disclosure, the reason for which will become apparent as he develops his narrative. He has blogged ad nauseam about the need for a two state solution, the plight of the Palestinian citizens and his fervent opposition to the Premiership of Benjamin Netanyahu. In addition atrocities and discrimination committed by the Israelis have been condemned.  

(Jay H. Ell’s analysis will not attempt to explain why the Jews have been the societal scapegoats for two thousand years but rather on the rationale behind modern day anti semitism).

The current anti semitism derives, in one way or another, from the mantra that, “The Israelis and Zionists are the new Nazis and the Palestinians are the new Jews”.

The basis to the above line of reasoning by the protagonists is that the Jews aren’t the problem just the Zionists and Israelis. No distinction however is made between the Israelis who desire a two State solution which percentage is similar to that of the Palestinians at approximately fifty percent. Nor is there any allowance made for those Israelis who publicly oppose any discrimination of the indigenous Arab citizens and the Palestinians. In addition in the United States, for example by far the majority of Jews have oppose the current Israeli Government but support the nation State of Israel. Yet the Nazi smear does not discriminate between the latter and those Israelis and Zionists who support the annexation of the West Bank for example. To take that strain of reasoning one step further the increase in murder, hate crimes and desecration of all things Jewish throughout the world is usually linked to “Israeli imperialism” even though the indiscriminate victimization is on those not remotely connected with Israel.

Another variation to the argument is that Israel has no right to exist anyway. - the Israelis have stolen the land from Palestinians. Therefore the polemic is not against all Jews but only Jews that agree with the establishment of the State of Israel. Without resorting to the two thousand year history argument of Israel’s legitimacy, the creation of the State of Israel was initiated under the UK Labour Government and voted by a two thirds majority of United Nations members. The land was to be divided between the Palestinians and the Israelis on the basis of the occupancy in 1947. Had the former and the surrounding Arab Sates agreed the State of Palestine would have been much bigger than Israel.  Notably there would have been minimal displacement of both Palestinians and Jews. Roughly a similar number of Palestinians and Jews have been displaced. The latter from the surrounding Arab States where they had resided for centuries. The rationale for their expulsion was the establishment of the State of Israel which those Jews had absolutely nothing to do with. The majority of the displaced Palestinians left voluntarily of their own accord. Those that remained in Israeli territory are full citizens of Israel today, albeit that the Netanyahu administration have discriminated against them.

The other side of this coin is while the alleged abuses of human rights of the Israelis and the diaspora jewry that support them are condemned, no finger is pointed at the Hamas and the PLO’s  alleged terrorism and oppression of their own citizens. The fact is that it is common cause that whether the Israelis are justified or not in responding to “terrorist” or “freedom fighter” attacks Palestinian citizens, especially children, are placed in harms way. This behavior passes unnoticed. Nor are the military operations initiated under the cover of hospitals or schools criticized. Without belaboring the point further if human rights are the issue there is on its face plenty of blame to go around. Then has Corbyn read the Hamas Constitution which is a racist diatribe with its principle goal being the destruction of Israel? Has he even acknowledged the resurfacing of the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion which is explicitly referred to in the Hamas Constitution which accepts as fact that Jews, (not just the Israelis and Zionists), are involved in a conspiracy to take over the world.

Just for one moment there should be some reflection on the situation in Israel which unhappily is not bucking the trend of world wide populism. In spite of the Israeli leadership's totalitarian tendencies there is still the rule of law, a free press and universal franchise. In one area however Israel is ahead of the world in that the alleged corruptive excesses of their leader have resulted in his criminal indictment in the belief that no one, not even the Prime Minister, is above the law.

The irresistible conclusion is that the rationale of the new world wide anti semitism scourge, is on the basis of the establishment of the nation state of Israel. An analysis of Corbyn’s alleged failure to root out anti semitism in his party generally can well be traced to the modern anti semitism rationale. As the anti semitism escalates It is evident that Israel’s creation is just as well as where else, for example, could the Jews of the United Kingdom go if a Labour Government comes into power and they perceive they are no longer equal citizens?

AT THE END OF THE DAY 

The United Kingdom is in a political mess. The same country that saved the world from totalitarianism, racism and bigotry is ironically enmeshed in a racist controversy of its own. In addition this crisis has emerged when there is a polarization of the two main political parties and the country is deciding its geopolitical future.

The bewildered British electorate has to live with the consequences of a decision they made, in an ill-conceived simplistically framed referendum, to leave the European Union. Ironically at the time of the Brexit referendum both major political parties, who the selfsame electorate had voted for, vehemently opposed leaving Europe.

The agonizing that many will have to face is whether or not to participate in the election as to the type of Brexit they are going to have. The recommendation they have received from many activists is that even if they desire the more acceptable Brexit that Labour may offer, their racism needs to be condemned at the ballot box, as in this election, to quote Chief Rabbi Mirvis, “The soul of the nation is at stake”.  

It can all change in a minute Donald J. Trump is coming into town for the NATO Meeting