Following up on what I wrote about Gaza, I want to take up the bias of the West on these issues.
Antisemitism is more prevalent now than at any time since the Second World War. That is not disputed. It is pernicious, blighting and destroying lives. And Israel’s atrocities in Gaza have been seized on by a tiny minority to attack all Jews, which is obscene.
Nevertheless, one can be sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians, and critical of Israel’s behaviour towards them, without being antisemitic. In this context, some of the actions taken (or, in the case of Suella Braverman, contemplated) to avoid offending Jews go too far. In London an exhibition of children’s artwork was removed from a hospital because of a complaint that came from a rampantly pro-Israeli lobby. In Germany, an award ceremony for the Palestinian writer Adania Shibli at the Frankfurt Book Fair was postponed indefinitely. And Suella Braverman tried to bully the London Metropolitan Police into banning the Armistice Day protest march against Israel, characterising it as a hate march. Braverman, who is so toxic she should come with a hazard symbol, alleged (wrongly) that the Police have more sympathy for left-wing protest groups than they do for far right groups. Perhaps this is because her sympathies are the reverse; in any case, for her to describe anyone else as hateful is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
Moderate Jews have dissociated themselves for this behaviour. However, hateful extremist pro-Isrealis would probably dismiss them as traitors or self-hating Jews.
If you think I am not being sympathetic enough to Jews who are intimidated by the sight of art work at a hospital, or Palestinian flags at a protest march, I have two points to make in return.
Firstly, if freedom of speech is to mean anything it will occasionally offend. It can exclude incitement to violence, but it cannot be curtailed to accommodate everyone’s notion of what is good taste or good manners.
Secondly, there is a flip side to the antisemitism coin; it’s called Islamophobia. And it’s rampant. When Zac Goldsmith ran for Lord Mayor of London against Sadiq Khan, he used it (thankfully unsuccessfully) as part of his campaign strategy. But there was no question of censure. Indeed he is now a Lord. I am quite sure I and others could walk down Pall Mall or the Unter den Linden with banners portraying Islam as illiberal, bigoted and misogynistic and no-one would stop us. Of course I don’t really think that of Islam in general, although I accept that some sects of Islam could meet that description, as could some sects of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and even Buddhism.
Finally, a further sign of Israel's moral unravelling is that it is becoming increasingly intolerant of criticism even within its Jewish citizenry (and far more so within its Arab citizenry). Until recently, those who had been to Israel would always acknowledge its political tolerance as one of its undoubted strong qualities, and in sharp contrast to its Arab neighbours. But I can’t say that I am surprised that this is changing. With the rise of right-wing, hardline, doctrinaire elements in Jewish politics, it was inevitable. I have one gay friend who, when I criticise Israel, always points out that it is the only country in the region where homosexuality is not outlawed. I don’t see that lasting much longer.
