What’s the Tory problem with Islamophobia? They can’t even bring themselves to utter the word

The Conservatives’ painful reluctance to punish party figures for Islamophobic comments has stark parallels with Jeremy Corbyn’s grudging attempts to confront antisemitism. But Labour’s hard yards may yet prove instructive, says Sean O’Grady

Back to school: Rishi Sunak – pictured with his disgraced former deputy chairman Lee Anderson – must accept his party has a problem with Islamophobia (Jacob King/PA Wire)

A few years ago, it’s fair to say, the Labour Party had a problem with antisemitism. Still does, as we see from the things the party’s former candidate in Rochdale was saying about the war in Gaza, Israel and the influence of “Jewish quarters” over politicians in his own (ex) party. It’s a work in progress, and probably always will be, but at least there has been that progress since the darker days.

Much of that has to do with Keir Starmer’s efforts to uproot this evil – but it was also because Labour, during and after Jeremy Corbyn’s complacent leadership, received a thorough schooling in the origins, nature and unique aspects of antisemitism. They were hammered for it until it sunk in.

There is no hierarchy of racism – but every type of racism has its sometimes unique manifestations and legacy, and there is much to be said for understanding them, the better to resist them.

So it is with Islamophobia and the need for the Conservatives to take a long, hard look at themselves, and have a little think about it. It would be trite, simplistic, even offensive, to say the Conservative Party has the identical problem with Islamophobia as the Labour had (or has) with antisemitism before its partial enlightenment, but the parallels are striking and disturbing.

There is the same painful reluctance to punish party figures for saying Islamophobic things as there was when Labour was confronted with antisemitic remarks by MPs and members, especially online. Action, where it is taken, is grudging and half-hearted. Had Lee Anderson simply, and quickly, said “sorry” for saying that Sadiq Khan and London were in the control of Islamists (ie terrorists) who were “his mates”, but not withdrawn or disowned the sentiments behind his remarks, he’d actually still be a member of the parliamentary Conservative Party.

Under pressure, he has today partially relented on what he said, but still refuses to retract it, even though he has gone some way to showing an understanding of why what he did say was Islamophobic – as if the final act of penitence is just too much for his pride. It shows an incomplete grasp of Islamophobia, as well as some wilful ignorance of the fact that operational policing is not controlled by politicians in London or anywhere else – otherwise Anderson could tell the coppers who to arrest (and order “lefty lawyers” to convict them).

This is Anderson’s latest, in fairness: “Khan has stood by and allowed our police to turn a blind eye to the disgusting scenes around parliament. It is not my intention to upset anyone, I believe in free speech and have 100 per cent respect for people of all backgrounds. The vast majority of Muslims are not Islamists, in the same way the vast majority of Christians are not conservatives or socialists. The vast majority of our Muslim friends in the UK are decent, hardworking citizens who make an amazing contribution to our society, and their religion should not be blamed for the actions of a tiny minority of extremists.”

It should not be coming to this. Even now, all those at the top of the party – Oliver Dowden, Grant Shapps, Rishi Sunak himself – will say is that Anderson was “wrong” to say Khan was a puppet of Islamist terrorists. They fail to see, or admit, that Anderson’s words were an example of anti-Muslim hate or that he, Anderson, is an Islamophobe.

Indeed, Dowden denied that dear old Lee, despite his outspoken record, “intended to be Islamophobic”. Anderson might differ. Even if that were true, being generous, then it suggests that the special nature of Islamophobia is not understood in the party – in the same way that Labour antisemites didn’t see why their views were antisemitic.

The higher up in the Tory party you are – and the bigger the potential threat to the leadership and what’s left of party cohesion – the more immune you are to being reprimanded. Anderson has had the whip taken off him for saying that London is controlled by Islamists. Suella Braverman isn’t even contradicted for saying that Britain is now controlled by Islamists.

According to Dowden, Liz Truss didn’t call out Steve Bannon for referring to Tommy Robinson a “hero”, when she appeared with Trump’s former strategist at CPAC last week, because she might not have caught what Bannon said, even though he was standing next to her, is pretty voluble, and the words were being amplified through a sound system. Instead, she made Rochdale out to be a centre of Islamist violence. Or maybe some of us don’t understand Truss’s sense of English irony.

Labour used to be in denial about antisemitism, with its special historical significance, and preferred to call it anti-Jewish hate, and it was always bracketed by Corbyn with some formula about it being utterly condemned “like all forms of racism” and had no place in the Labour Party. For this he was condemned, but at least Corbyn could bring himself to utter the word “antisemitism”.

Now we find that Sunak and his cabinet use the same sorts of evasive language that Corbyn and his allies used to – and cannot bring themselves to utter the word “Islamophobia”. Thus, Sunak declares simply that: “I believe racism or prejudice of any kind is completely unacceptable, and we must stamp it out.”

As ever, Kemi Badenoch, woefully miscast as minister for equalities, is rather more direct, in answering Labour chair Anneliese Dodds: “We use the term ‘anti-Muslim hatred’. It makes clear the law protects Muslims. In this country, we have a proud tradition of religious freedom and the freedom to criticise religion. The definition of ‘Islamophobia’ she uses creates a blasphemy law via the back door if adopted.”

Maybe it’s best to leave aside any questions about how the term antisemitism fits in with that doctrine of hers and turn to a more constructive approach.

Perhaps the time has come for the Conservatives to admit they have a problem (they can do that privately if it’s embarrassing), and quietly start to point out to their own followers that it is wrong to blame all Muslim people for acts of terror or the activities of grooming gangs or anything else, as if they were collectively to blame and the sole source of terrorism or child sexual abuse.

Tory leaders could point out that no one of Muslim heritage in Britain in public life is “controlled” by terrorists; they are not to be lazily equated. But there is here a parallel with antisemitism that bears comparison – blaming Jewish people for what Israeli governments do, and building obscene conspiracies on supposed religious rituals. We could quite usefully show how aspects of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism illuminate how people can slip into Islamophobia.

As the IHRA correctly states: “Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.”

And: “Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.”

Substitute the word “Muslims” for “Jews”, for the purposes of illumination, and the likes of Lee Anderson might see the deeper assumptions and prejudices that lie behind his words. Once you understand that your Muslim neighbour, schoolmate, colleague or just someone you pass in the street is not responsible for the Manchester Arena bombing or 7/7 – and finds those murders as abhorrent as anyone else – some of the struggle is won.

What the Tories need to do now is clear. They need to accept there is a problem. From what can be discerned from leaked WhatsApp messages and activity on social media, far too many Conservative supporters and people on the right see nothing wrong with what Anderson said, and even think Islamophobia is a made-up word for a rational belief.

A Conservative Party serious about this needs to discipline and expel the Islamophobes. It needs to appoint an expert independent adviser on anti-Muslim hate. They need a leader who’ll take that effort on from the top. They need to accept the term Islamophobia and adopt a working definition of it (as it happens, the All Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia and the Runnymede Trust have excellent drafts readily available). And they have to get on with it.

If they’re feeling a bit queasy about the fight and alienating “their people”, they could always ask Starmer for some advice. He’s been through it. Now it’s their turn.