Don't even think about it

Thursday, November 16, 2006

I took my degree at the London School of Economics in the early 1970s when it was unusual for having a very high number of overseas students. They came from all parts of the world, and many of them were in political exile: from apartheid South Africa and white minority rule Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe); from Franco's Spain, the colonels' Greek dictatorship; from Saddam Hussein's Iraq and the Shah's Iran (it was estimated that one in three Iranian students in Britain was a spy for his secret police, SAVAK).

I have thought about many of those people this week as I hear more and more stories about students facing the prospect of the authorities spying or allowing spying on 'suspicious' students who might be attracted to terrorism. A meeting organised by the students' union at the University of East London on Tuesday spelt out opposition to this approach. A thought police in the colleges was unacceptable, and would lead to people being demonised on grounds of race or religion. Students doing certain courses would be more open to suspicion. Students regarded as 'extremists' would be singled out.

Back then, we assumed that there would be people informing these repressive reginmes on individuals. But we never dreamt that college authorities, encouraged by a Labour government, would be talking about spying on students.

If that had happened in the 1970s, political exiles would have had a very hard time, would have been thrown out of colleges and perhaps deported to sometimes torture and even death. It would also have created a climate of fear where we would have found it impossible to discuss in a free and open way, which should be an essential of any university.

Many of them were branded terrorists, extremists and subversives. Some undoubtedly now are middle aged pillars of the community in countries whose politics have changed dramatically in 30 years. They had to fight for their rights then, and we are having to defend democracy now, by resisting the incursions into college political life.

Our People's Assembly this weekend has students, trade unionists, Muslim activists, Stop the War members, coming together to discuss the relationship between war, Islamophobia and the attacks on civil liberties. It's followed on Monday by a big rally in Westminster called by the British Muslim Initiative on religious freedom.

They couldn't come at a better time, as we face open season on Muslims where 'radicalism' = 'extremism'='terrorism'. Where do we draw the line? Are people who understand the grievances of terrorists the same as terrorists? Are those who attend anti war meetings or marches 'extremists' or merely people expressing their political opinions?

Support is coming from new and sometimes unexpected quarters. Claudia Roden's books on Middle East cookery and Mediterranean cookery have been regular companions of mine over the years and I have found out a lot about the region as well as the food by reading them.

She describes the People's Assembly as a 'community bridge-builder,' and says, 'As an Egyptian Jew who was born and lived in a Muslim world where there once reigned harmony and respect between religious communities, as a Jew who feels deeply hurt when Jews are demonised and who knows what that has led to in the past, I feel very sad and worried that we have come, in Britain, to demonise a religion that I respect and people who are my friends'.

With her, actors Prunella Scales and Timothy West, academics, MPs and trade union leaders, the Muslim community is gathering support which it desperately needs to organise a fight back.

11/16/2006 03:42:00 PM | Permalink

Halloween in the House of Horror

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

What will it take for Labour MPs to vote against the Iraq war? Clearly more than 655,000 Iraqi dead, a disastrous occupation, and polls which show 62% of people in Britain want the troops pulled out immediately.

Yesterday, Margaret Beckett, in a speech which must amount to an insult to her own intelligence, let alone everyone else's, claimed that the time was not right for an inquiry, that any vote for such an inquiry would give succour to terrorists, and that Iraq was heading towards democracy.

No wonder there are problems imposing democracy on the Middle East when we base it on our model. Because yesterday was an appalling day for democracy. The government won not because of the superiority of its arguments, not because most of its own supporters even believe those arguments, but because Labour MPs meekly trot into the division lobbies to vote along party lines, regardless of the consequences.

Calling it a debate gives the wrong impression. Most of the time the chamber is pretty empty, filling up at the beginning and the end, when suddenly the various ministers and other members of the payroll vote appear, vote as they're told to and go off for other more important business.

The parties which tabled the debate, Plaid Cymru and the SNP, should be congratulated for getting it onto the agenda and for uniting so much opposition behind them. They managed to win all the parties apart from Labour and forced the pro war Tories to oppose the government, however pathetically. Their arguments were good, but simply not answered.

Perhaps the most idiotic question to them was what did Iraq have to do with the people of Scotland and Wales? The best known anti-war MP, George Galloway, was not even called to speak.

All credit, too, to the 12 Labour MPs who joined the opposition. But why so few? Some abstained, although this only helped the government. No doubt many will say they could not go into the lobbies with the Tories. But Labour MPs went into the lobbies with the Tories when they took us to war.

The truth is, those MPs who voted with the government this time have let the anti-war movement, and the majority of their constituents, down. Just like those who voted for war three and a half years ago. Except this time, there really isn't any excuse.

11/01/2006 04:29:00 PM | Permalink