Judaism – Observations and Misunderstandings

I listened to a podcast today on Israel, Labour and anti-semitism. It was a few months old from the glory days of Jeremy Corbyn prior to the election and before it was clear he would finally stand down and nobody gave a shit about anti-semitism anymore. In reality the podcast discussed Israel far more that Labour and this is more what I would like to focus on.

The main idea that entered my mind was how both side have such strength in belief that they are the ones on the right side of both morality and history. At one point they were discussing the concept of Zionism and what it means for both. For one the understanding is that zionism is merely a militaristic and nationalistic excuse for expansion, genocide and power under the guise of protecting a religion. Criticism of Zionism from this perspective has nothing to do with Judaism and accusations of anti-semitism are laughed off as attempts by right-wingers to deflect from the actions of the state of Israel. Proponents of the other side belief that Zionism and Judaism are intrinsically linked, that Zionism is connected to the very survival of the Jewish people. An attack therefore on Zionism is an anti-semitic attack upon the Jewish people, to attack the validity of Zionism is an attack upon the very existence of a people.

The podcast was a progressive one and it was interviewing a British Israeli man who seemed reasonably neutral. He believed that the majority in Israel linked Zionism with Judaism and were for that reason supportive of Israel strengthening it’s position in the region. It would create a safe haven for the Jewish people, something strongly felt in the national conscious after the horrors of the holocaust. Of course while that may be the majority it doesn’t mean that everyone believes this, and there is a large anti-zionist anti-nationalist movement in Israel, it does explain why people see attacks on Israel as anti-semitic though. I am not suggesting for a second that all the vitriol against Corbyn and Labour at the last election was justified, but it has made me understand another perspective in a way that I and I suspect many others haven’t fully comprehended before.

For me the idea I am being anti-semitic when I accuse Israel of doing wrong, and even when I question whether the state of Israel should exist considering events surrounding and since it’s establishment, I am in no way equating it with Judaism but merely the political ideology of Zionism. From that perspective it sounds so ludicrous to be accused of anti-semitism that it is dismissed as an illegitimate political attack and manipulation of fear around genuine anti-semitism. While I don’t doubt there is an element of that it doesn’t take into consideration that if people genuinely equate Israel, Zionism and Judaism all as one thing, holistically existing together and depending on each other, then an attack on one is an attack on all. While I may not necessarily agree with it it is understandable to link the three of them, especially Israel and Judaism, together, who am I to say that they’re not and cannot be.

My intention here is not to argue one way or another but merely to acknowledge that there is another way to view this and while that is obvious, it leads to a bit more of an understanding that being accused to anti-semitism for attacking Israel perhaps has more to it than dismissing it as just another political stunt. I can see why someone may believe something, not just what they believe; it doesn’t have to change your mind but it certainly allows for an understanding that yours is not the only one. And with that it’s time to acknowledge another groundbreaking event…stop the press…this man just discovered there is another side to an argument…

There is a real dearth of interesting and balanced reporting in these days of polarised corporate media. There is one magazine that I doubt can be classed as independent but which I have been enjoying recently and that is The Economist. It doesn’t appear to sit on either side of the spectrum and doesn’t seem to espouse a centrist position either which is even more reassuring. It reports world events and these can range from small pieces on which countries have the most dangerous roads to immediate and large stories about today’s corrupt attempt at bringing ‘peace’ to Palestine. They also have a pretty active podcast channel and it is this that is the driver behind my mentioning of them.

Today there was an interview with Nicolas Pelham, their Middle East correspondent, who when visiting Iran in July last year was detained at the airport and forced to stay for another seven weeks. It was an incredibly interesting interview and he gave a version of Iran that is rarely seen in the media. It seemed neither pro nor anti Iran, and while he explained the genuine dangers he was in and the realities of life in a dictatorship, he also painted a picture of a welcoming, hospitable and open people. This is the version I have felt having met Iranians in the past and from stories of those who have travelled the country. He was under a sort of house arrest; he had questioning in the morning and then would spend the afternoon and evening exploring Tehran. He was given a mobile phone, which he knew was bugged but which he could use to call home and he says that perversely he felt freer in those weeks than he did at any time in the week he had initially only planned on being there. He also admits that in no way was his ordeal comparable to other foreigners detained there such as Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliff, the British Iranian woman who has been detained in solitary confinement in Iranian jail for nearly four years.

What is interesting though is that he is Jewish and has spent time reporting from Jerusalem. He believed at first that this may have been a factor in his arrest but questioning never followed that route in any serious way. While there he visited the Jewish community in Tehran. It numbers about eight to ten thousand, which is about ten percent of it’s peak prior to the Arab-Israeli War, and is the largest Jewish community outside of Israel in the Middle East. When speaking with members of the community he discovered they feel safer there than in major western cities such as Paris or London and are largely left alone. He himself said it was more dangerous for him being British than Jewish in Iran.

The importance of this cannot be overlooked in regards geopolitics. The Press reports that Iran has vowed to obliterate Israel, doesn’t recognise their right to exist and that Israelis and Jewish people are in constant danger of Iranian attack at any moment. This is portrayed as anti-semitism and that the Iranian government simply hates Israel existing because they are Jewish. This seems to be at odds to the reality of this comparatively large Jewish community within Iran. Really it’s another indictment of a corrupt media, that to attack Israel is to attack Judaism, but evidently it can’t be further from the truth. We saw this recently in the UK with the constant anti-semitic slurs against pro-Palestinian Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. He refused to agree to include as part of a definition of anti-semitism in the party’s charter; that criticism of Israel and anti-semitic attacks on the Jewish community were one and the same thing.

This was a rare and honest conversation on Iran, and one with someone who was in danger of experiencing their worst tendencies. It left you in no doubt of the potential perils which can await within the country but also gave a wonderful endorsement of the people and culture, which also included his minders and guards incidentally. This is a link to the podcast for anyone interested in listening to it. Sometimes it is refreshing to experience reporting that doesn’t appear to be pushing any one thing more than the truth.

Tag: Judaism

Zion Train

Jewish Iranians