During a February edition of the popular British TV programme ‘Question Time’ which sees members of the public pose questions to politicians, something quite remarkable took place. A Jewish contingent in the audience delivered a ferocious attack on panelist George Galloway, relentlessly heckling him for his alleged role in the rise of anti-semitism. Whilst George Galloway is ardently opposed to anti-semitism, he was accused of fuelling it through his fierce opposition to Israel.
There is a direct link between the Israel-Palestine conflict and anti-semitism. However, it is less clear how this link can shine light on solutions to the problem. This leaves British Jews in a precarious position; violence in Gaza could resume at any time and if it does, they will be made vulnerable.
In 2014, more anti-semitic attacks took place in the UK than were recorded in any previous year, with the perpetrators spanning across ethnic backgrounds . It marked the first time this number surpassed 1,000 and has inevitably led to fear in Jewish communities. Last year also saw a resumption of military action in Gaza. Over 2,000 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces, almost 500 of them children, and 500,000 were displaced from their homes. The two events are directly related. Almost half of last year’s anti-semitic incidents occurred during July and August – the same two months that fighting in Gaza resumed – and half of these explicitly referenced the conflict.
The blame for the attacks ultimately lies with the culprits; they need to understand what they can and cannot do. Education is therefore key. However education, whether delivered in a school or a prison, is often viewed as a long-term solution. It takes time to reform someone. Thus the temptation is to look for more immediate solutions. To this end, George Galloway stressed the need for all – Jews and non-Jews alike – to draw a clear distinction between the actions of Israel and Jewish people. In this, he is correct. Though Israel has a largely Jewish population, Jewish people are not necessarily Israeli – in fact, more Jews live outside Israel than inside it. Furthermore, the opposition by many Jews to Israel’s military campaign proves that to be Jewish does not necessarily mean to support Israel’s foreign policy.
It is unclear, however, whether awareness of this distinction alone will solve the problem. Suppose that a successful campaign led to fewer people conflating Judaism with Israel. Whilst it is feasible that attacks on Jews would subside, there is no reason to believe that these would not be replaced by attacks on those with links to Israel, or those that support Israel. The problem at hand is one of violence, not ignorance. An alternative approach implied by some of Question Time’s audience members is to tame the anti-Israel rhetoric. They criticised George Galloway for the way he delivers his message, which includes his infamous pledge to make Bradford an ‘Israel-free zone’, and claimed that he adds flames to an already heated issue. However, in a liberal society that prides itself on the freedom of speech, it would be wrong to resist the right of politicians to be passionate communicators. Within certain limits, such as the explicit promotion of violence, one has the right to express any political view in any manner they so wish. We can and should encourage influential figures on both sides of the debate to encourage peaceful action. But we cannot endorse the content of what they say, or the manner in which they deliver it.
This leaves little consolation for Britain’s Jewish communities, who may have fleeting confidence in their safety following any resumption of fighting in Israel-Palestine. I believe, however, that the Government could play a bigger role in improving the situation. Protesters to Israel’s military response were inevitably angered by the response of Ministers, which avoided any condemnation of Israel’s use of force and instead “supported its right to defend itself”. A better approach would have been to at least acknowledge the views of those opposed to Israel’s military campaign. A majority of Britons felt Israel acted disproportionately, and tens of thousands took to the streets in protest. These people will have felt ignored, which can have dangerous consequences if they then turn to more radical and more violent ways of expressing their sentiments.
It is unfortunate that events thousands of miles away can directly impact the way communities are treated. The actions of extremists in the Middle East fuel Islamophobia across Europe, the actions of Israel’s military increase anti-semitism in the UK. The typical measures of crime prevention – deterrence, detection, reform and education – have a key role to play in reducing hate crime. It is important to also look at what else can be done. A two-pronged approach might deliver some results. These ‘prongs’ would consist of firstly encouraging influential figures to regularly reiterate the need for peace, and secondly for the Government to engage with protesters more than it does at present. However, until the figures show a reversal, it remains unclear whether this will be enough to deliver the results that the Jewish communities want and deserve.
About the Author
