Just weeks after the latest direct conflict between Israel and Gaza dominated headlines, The Guardian and The Huffington Post UK brought together Jonathan Freedland and Mehdi Hasan - two of Britain’s leading commentators – to talk about the current atmosphere between British Muslims and Jews; their relationship prone to be held hostage to events happening in the Middle East.
Mehdi Hasan wrote for the Guardian’s Comment is Free section until he left his role as a senior editor the New Statesmen to become political editor of the Huffington Post UK in 2012. In his final article, he wrote about British Muslims feeling alienated from participating on the public stage because of the prejudice Muslim commentators, like himself, encountered:
I used to encourage Muslim students to get involved in the media or in politics, but I now find it much harder to do so. Why would I want anyone else to go through what I’ve gone through? Believe me, Muslims aren’t endowed thicker skins than non-Muslims.
Two days later, Jonathan Freedland wrote a follow-up piece, sympathising with the abuse Mehdi received after the article was published:
Each time I come across the kind of abuse he cites I mentally replace the word “Islam” with “Judaism” and “Muslim” with “Jew”. I know how I would feel if I was bombarded with long screeds denouncing Jewish faith and customs as sinister, alien, backward or bonkers, just as I know how I would feel if I were told Jews need to change their ways if they are to be accepted into polite society... So yes, I’m glad to stand with Mehdi Hasan, even when we don’t see eye to eye.
Face to face at the Royal Institution of Great Britain, Jonathan and Mehdi sat with chair Anita Anand, who was overseeing the discussion.
The discussion began with a brief exploration of the importance of balanced debate. Mehdi explained the importance of exploring different opinions without dismissing those differences as bad faith; in his case, the occasional hostility he had encountered from the British Islamic community when he criticised elements of Islam. “We’ve lost the ability to have a genuine disagreement without questioning each others motives and that is a real problem for me,” he said. “If you say something that people don’t agree with, you’ve immediately sold out, you’ve immediately betrayed your people, you’ve immediately done something to get ahead with the mainstream or with the majority. There is never a sense that we may just disagree on the principles of this.”
Jonathan empathised, but said he had never felt overtly pressured to write to a particular tune when contributing to titles like The Jewish Chronicle. “The way I see the double act is to say whatever the audience of that paper don’t want to hear,” he said. “The comfort zone they are getting from plenty of other writers, so in The Jewish Chronicle I don’t particularly feel the need, because I think they are well served in this area,” he said, to laughter.
Anita Anand bought up the relationship between antisemitism and anti-Zionism, with both Jonathan and Mehdi pointing out that the label Zionist was often used interchangeably for Jew. “You can criticise the occupation since 1967 and still feel bound up with Israel as a Jew,” said Jonathan. “Zionism doesn’t commit you to the size and scope of Israel.”
“You can be critical of Israel without being anti-Zionist. You can be an anti-Zionist, and then you can be a flaming anti-Semite,” said Mehdi. “Are there overlaps? Of course there are, just like with Islamism.” British Jews should not be held responsible for the actions of Israel, he argued; and Jonathan agreed, saying whatever bonds exist between the British Jewish community and Israel do not amount to approval of the political situation.
Hatreds Old & New #debate with #JohnathanFreedland & #MehdiHasan on #antisemitism & #islamophobia An engaging debate which raised and discussed a diffcult and complex issue. One point which resonated is the importance of building relations no matter how small. #guardianlive
On Islamophobia, Mehdi acknowledged there was a gap between those with legitimate concerns about issues around Islam and bigotry, bringing up the actions of ISIS in Syria and Iraq. The media is Islamophobic, he argued, saying: “I really don’t want to get into competitive victimhood but I would argue that the rise of anti-semitism is, while horrible, still not mainstream; like Islamophobia unfortunately has been mainstreamed in recent years.”
Jonathan countered that he sees a similar denial of antisemitism in the media: “The minute any kind of incident happens, queue a sort of doctoral-level discussion on whether it is really anti-semitic or not.”
Anita Anand asked whether Jonathan or Mehdi ever felt they were arming Britain’s far right with counter arguments. Jonathan described his irritation when opponents of Israel used his disapproval of Operation Protective Edge as ammunition, when they would usually dismiss him as a Zionist. Mehdi explained how he felt when he saw his criticisms of Islam used by the far-right to support their racism. “You will not change people’s minds with data, facts and figures. What does change people’s minds is relationships, which is why we are here, fundamentally,” he said, to applause.
Karen Pollock MBE, Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, was in the crowd at the event. She said afterwards: “This was an excellent forum for debate. It can be incredibly difficult to have a frank and open discussion about issues that so burn so deeply and create tension. This event allowed us to have meaningful discussion that concentrated on similarities and appreciated difference.”
Dr Shuja Shafi, the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain also attended the debate. “It was a frank discussion and there was a genuine desire to talk about these things sensibly and appropriately,” he said after. “I was personally encouraged to see there was a genuine desire to go beyond slogans, to deal with issues and at the same time, acknowledge there are differences.”
“The relationship between the Jewish and Muslim communities in this country is generally good and we want to make sure it stays that way,” he continued. “I think this is the first step for future debates. We can see that the format and the way people conducted themselves was the right way - so away we go!”
After the event, both Mehdi and Jonathan thanked the audience for participating:
... and it seems the debate had a lasting effect on some.
I’ve got no time to indulge lazy prejudice - #mehdihasan- #jonathanfreedland #anitahill discuss how difficult it is to diffuse racist sentiment whilst honoring opposing political views. #guardianlive has inspired me to reinstall twitter on my phone and #jointhedebate.
Interested in Guardian Live events? Click here to see the full events listings.
No comments:
Post a Comment