A grassroots campaign group called ‘The Muslim Vote’ is aiming to capitalise on the success of pro-Gaza candidates at the local election by issuing a set of 18 ‘demands’ of Keir Starmer. The organisation seeks to ‘punish’ MPs who fail to back a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel. It says that Labour must ‘return the Zionist money’, bin the government’s new extremism definition and slap a travel ban on pro-war Israeli politicians. The group says its members will turn to other parties if Starmer doesn’t listen up.
Not all the demands made by ‘The Muslim Vote’ relate to Gaza
On the question of Gaza, Labour is in an almighty pickle. Over the weekend, Starmer suggested he wanted to repair the damage done over the issue, indicating he wants ‘to win back their (voters’) trust and confidence’. But how can he reconcile those words with adopting a position on the war that won’t alienate supporters on either, or both, sides?
It’s a question Starmer, who often prefers to sit on the fence, must answer quickly: his party is already paying the price for his muddled view on the situation in the Middle East. Starmer has previously called for a ‘ceasefire that lasts’ in the Israel-Gaza conflict, but has stopped short of using the word ‘immediate’. Last year, he gave an interview in which he appeared to suggest Israel was within its rights to withhold water and power from Gaza. He then rowed back from that position. In doing so, he annoyed everyone.
This mess didn’t help Labour in Oldham, where it lost overall control council for the first time in over a decade. Despite winning the West Midlands Mayoral election, Starmer’s party lost tens of thousands of votes to an independent pro-Gaza candidate who has vowed to stand in the general election. Twenty Labour councillors left Labour last month claiming the national party no longer represented them. And despite Labour maintaining overall control of Bradford City Council (where the Muslim population constitutes 30.5 per cent of the population), there was a surge in independents winning seats – in protest over the way the party has handled the Middle East conflict. How Labour responds to ‘The Muslim Vote’ which suggests it can mobilise four million Muslim voters will be revealing.
There is little doubt that our country is changing, with the emergence of Islamic sectarian politics in the mainstream. The pressing issue today is Israel-Palestine, but perhaps it might be over Kashmir tomorrow. Local elections have historically been contested on parochial issues such as bin collections or repairing potholes. But world issues are also weighing on voters’ minds. Who would have imagined foreign policy issues might determine outcomes, or an elected Green Party politician in Leeds would shout ‘Allahu Akbar!’ on winning a seat? Labour cannot fail to be blind to the concerns of Muslim voters they have previously leant on for support.
Not all the demands made by ‘The Muslim Vote’ relate to Gaza. The organisation also says it wants to ‘ensure insurance quotes don’t cost more for someone called ‘Muhammed’’, urges Labour to ‘deliver alternative student finance’, and for the provision of ‘sharia-compliant pensions’ to be rolled out.
Unsurprisingly, ‘The Muslim Vote’ want Labour ‘to adopt the All-party parliamentary group’s Islamophobia definition’, which the party already signed up for in March 2019. The contested definition has also been included in ‘Labour’s Islamophobia Policy’, by its governing body in its members code of conduct. It is looking increasingly likely Labour will, in government, include the APPG definition in the proposed Race Equality Act. If Labour takes this final censorious step, it will likely alienate members of other faiths, like Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Buddhists, not least because the APPG definition risks shutting down discussion on historical truths, like the expansion of Islam via the sword. Merely uttering historical truths about certain aspects of Ottoman, Moorish or Mughal rule for example, could land someone in hot water. One of the other ‘demands’ being made is to, ‘Remove ‘extremism’ definition (Michael) gove [sic] introduced’.
‘The Muslim Vote’ confidently asserts that ‘we are not just a movement of talk. We mean business’. They claim to have the support of 25 organisations and ‘an audience of 20 million monthly visitors’, through affiliated groups.
Starmer wants to win support from Muslim voters in the run up to the general election, but Labour must tread very carefully on caving in to this organisation’s demands. Labour has so often championed a form of identity politics that treats minorities as one homogenous block and doesn’t factor diversity of opinion, or dissent. On the issue of Gaza, Starmer must remember that ‘The Muslim Vote’ doesn’t speak for all Muslims. Pandering to the ‘demands’ of one representative group is a slippery slope – especially when such a group warns that ‘there’s more [demands to come] but that’ll do for starters.’
Stephen Evans from the National Secular Society says ‘Labour need to steer well clear of this sort of divisive religious identity politics’. It’s hard to disagree with him – Starmer would be wise to take note.
Comments