http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1009141696142194720.htm December 24, 2001 International
Commentary British
Polite Society Has Found a Not-So-New
Target By Melanie Phillips, a columnist with the Daily
Mail in London. SINCE the war against terror started,
polite British society has found an enemy
to target. It's neither the Taliban nor al
Qaeda, however -- it's the state of Israel
and Jews in general. That's because a common belief has
suddenly emerged in Britain that the
Middle East is the cause of world terror
and that Israel is to blame for the
impasse there. This leads to anti-Zionism,
which is consequently used as a thin
disguise for anti-Semitism. People now
make remarks that would have been
inconceivable just a few months
previously. In an article in the Spectator
magazine, the writer Petronella
Wyatt recounted that she had been
asked recently whether she thought there
was an international Jewish conspiracy.
She also reported on a member of the House
of Lords of impeccable liberal credentials
saying, "Well, the Jews have been asking
for it and now, thank God, we can say what
we think at last." These are not isolated incidents. I
came up against the phenomenon when I was
a panel member on the BBC's flagship
current affairs program Question Time. On
the panel with me was the writer Will
Self, the Labour backbencher Diane
Abbott, the Tory politician Ken
Clarke and the Liberal Democrat MP
Ed Davey. 'Terrorism
on Both Sides'An Israeli member of the audience asked
why the Americans could go halfway round
the world to root out terror when the
Israelis were condemned for doing the same
in their own back yard. The other panel
members seemed to subscribe to precisely
that double standard. Mr. Davey said
Yasser Arafat couldn't be expected
to deal with the terrorists in his midst.
Ms. Abbott implied that Israel was
inflicting emotionally incontinent
brutality and vengeance on the
Palestinians. And Ken Clarke deplored the
"terrorism on both sides" (he later
remembered that there was a distinction
between terrorism and the reaction to
it). The audience was clearly hostile to
Israel and America. One man said the
Palestinians were the victims of Israeli
injustice. Another said Mr. Sharon was a
war criminal. A woman said that if
terrorism was the indiscriminate bombing
of innocent people, we need look no
further than what George W. Bush
was doing in Afghanistan, to great
applause. I took a very different line.
Yes, I said, there definitely was a double
standard; I wondered why people were
sympathetic when Israelis died but not
sympathetic when they tried to prevent
themselves from dying. I added that the
Palestinian Authority was a sponsor of
terror and incited violence daily against
Israelis and Jews across the world. As I spoke, I was aware of a low
hissing from the audience. I looked at
their faces and saw disbelief and
hostility. I glanced at the woman who had
made the George Bush point; her face was
contorted with what can only be described
as hatred. Then Will Self asked the
question that had clearly formed in his
mind after he read through a selection of
my articles on the train from London to
Bristol, where the show was being taped,
as he told me later he had. Where, he
demanded, did my own loyalties lie? If
Britain declared war on Israel, whose side
would I be on? I could scarcely believe
what I had heard. Will Self (who claimed
to be Jewish himself) was seeking to make
the wider world aware of two things:
first, that I was a Jew, and second, that
therefore my views on Israel could be
disregarded since Jews had double
loyalties. I replied that British Jews
were immensely patriotic. It was also
inconceivable that Britain should attack
Israel since Israel was a salient of
democracy in the Middle East. But if the
inconceivable were ever to happen, this
would represent such a turning against
Jews that some of us British Jews might
feel we had no alternative but to live in
Israel. That of course was entirely
different from being a traitor to one's
own country. When I said, however, that Israel was a
democracy, there was an astonishing
reaction from the audience. They laughed.
That incredulous laugh was more shocking
even than Will Self's attack. It revealed
that however many Israeli teenagers are
blown to smithereens by suicide bombers,
the British have seen the pictures of
Israel's tanks demolishing Palestinian
houses and above all seen the pictures of
those Palestinian children being killed by
Israeli soldiers, and they have formed the
view that Israel is a tyranny and the Jews
are the real terrorists. The program discussion lurched from bad
to worse. From the audience came the
considered view that Israel was the source
of terror in the Middle East, that what it
was doing was as bad as what was done to
it, and that it was responsible for ethnic
cleansing. Just a show? I believe that the
visceral hostility towards Israel and Jews
displayed by both the panel and the
audience are indicative now of much
mainstream British opinion. Indeed, the
British government appears to believe that
if only the United States would put
pressure on Israel, there would be peace
in the Middle East. Such opinions are marked by such
blatant double standards and an inverted
sense of right and wrong that one has to
ask the reason for such perversity. Why is
Israel portrayed as murderous when it is
clearly attempting -- however misguidedly
-- to defend itself against terror? Why do
these upstanding British citizens omit to
mention that the Palestinian Authority
daily pumps out through its mass media
Nazi-style anti-Jewish libels and
incitements to murder and martyrdom? There
are several likely explanations. The
British instinctively side with the
underdog. At home, they resent the fact
that the Jews punch well above their
numerical weight by being overrepresented
in the professions. In Israel, they see
the Jews, with the might of America behind
them, pulverizing Palestinians armed only
with stones. Self-LoathingThen there is the fact that the
establishment, that is, Labour MPs, the
liberal broadsheet newspapers and in
particular the BBC -- are also dominated
by the thinking of the New Left, the
Marxist revisionism that that replaced the
class struggle by the culture war. The New
Left is characterized by an abiding hatred
of Israel, America and a self-loathing
about Western values. The result is that
the British intellectual classes are an
all-too willing conduit for anti-Jewish
and anti-Israel poison and propaganda. In
the face of all this, British Jews are
astonishingly silent, probably because
they are hardly less horrified by the
scenes of Palestinian misery that unfold
daily across their TV screens. But
one does not have to be a fan of Ariel
Sharon to see that criticisms of
Israeli tactics are almost beside the
point. For Israel's very existence is
threatened. The Palestine Authority makes
it abundantly clear in all it says for
internal consumption that it regards the
whole of "Palestine" as occupied and will
be satisfied with nothing less than the
destruction of the Jewish state. Israel has never troubled to make its
case effectively to a world which it
assumes will always be hostile or
indifferent. But it never foresaw that
Palestinian terror--whose purpose was to
provoke a counter-reaction that would turn
the world against Israel and destroy the
Jewish state's very soul -- would be
financed by the Western world. But this is
what has happened. The West, especially in
Europe, has fallen for the propaganda of
victim culture. The EU, of which Britain
is a member, is the largest supplier of
funds to the PA. The result is that the
British, far from making common cause
against global terror, have succumbed to
the very prejudices that lie behind
it. Related items on
thiswebsite: -
Embassy Row
Scandal Consumes Fleet Street
-
The
society queen, the ambassador and the
careless whispers that stunned salon
set
-
Envoy
Can't Remember Insult
-
Wall
Street Journal reports on the
furor
|