Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Britain's affair with antisemitism

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/29/chilcot-inquiry-oliver-miles
Britain's affair with antisemitism
By questioning the allegiances of Jews serving on the Chilcot inquiry, 
Sir Oliver Miles continues a long tradition of prejudice
David Cesarani
In November 2009, Sir Oliver Miles, a distinguished retired diplomat 
with years of service in the Middle East, wrote an article in the 
Independent lamenting that two Jews had been appointed to the Chilcot 
inquiry into the Iraq war. He triggered a spat that threatens the 
integrity of the inquiry and exposes the tenacity of prejudice in 
sections of British society.
Sir Miles didn't much approve of the other members, either. But he 
singled out the choice of Sir Lawrence Freedman and Sir Martin Gilbert. 
The fact that they were Jews, and that Gilbert was also well known as a 
champion of Israel, would provide "handy ammunition" for attacks on the 
committee's work, especially in the Arab media. Sir Miles was ticked off 
by the Times a few days later and there the matter might have rested. 
However, Sir Martin has now reignited the affair by suggesting that the 
attacks smack of antisemitism. Unaccountably he vented his ire in an 
interview on a rightwing Zionist online radio station serving Israeli 
settlers.
Sir Martin's retort actually fuels the row and may even overshadow the 
interrogation of Tony Blair. At another level, the controversy throws 
into doubt the vaunted multiculturalism of modern Britain and lays bare 
a stubborn vein of intolerance that has blighted the treatment of 
immigrants and minorities for centuries.
In a confrontation on BBC Newsnight last night, Denis MacShane MP 
accused Sir Oliver of resurrecting prejudices about the Jews that were 
more typical of the 1930s. He protested that it was unacceptable to make 
religion a criteria for determining whether a person was fit for public 
office, no matter what the task. In fact, discrimination against the 
Jews persisted a lot longer than that. In his history of MI5, 
Christopher Andrews regretted that the security services refused to 
employ Jews long into the postwar era. But the spooks were only 
continuing a tradition that went back to the 19th century and a furore 
that eerily prefigures the one we are currently witnessing.
In 1876, an uprising of Bulgarian Christians against Ottoman rule 
provoked a murderous response from the Muslim Turkish authorities. 
William Gladstone, former prime minister and grand old man of the 
Liberal Party, was so enraged by the massacres of Christians that he 
published a pamphlet The Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East. 
In it, he lambasted the then prime minister Benjamin Disraeli for 
abandoning the victims in preference for a pro-Turkish policy. Even 
though it had long been British policy to support the Ottoman Empire, 
Gladstone ascribed Disraeli's stance to the fact that he was born a Jew 
and therefore sympathised with the Ottomans who had treated their Jews 
fairly – unlike the new Christian states in the Balkans.
Writing to a Jewish correspondent who questioned this response, 
Gladstone explained: "I have always had occasion to admire the conduct 
of the English Jews in the discharge of their civil duties; but I deeply 
deplore the manner in which, what I may call Judaic sympathies, beyond 
as well as within the circle of professed Judaism, are now acting on the 
question of the East; while I am aware that as regards the Jews 
themselves, there may be much to account for it."
Gladstone's peculiar reference to those "beyond" the community of 
observant Jews was a swipe at Disraeli who had been baptised into the 
Anglican communion aged 12. He believed that Disraeli was perversely 
motivated by some residual racial loyalty. Gladstone had more respect 
for Jews affiliated to their community, but they fared little better. 
Their dual loyalty was simply more obvious and explicable.
Within a short time, Gladstone's tirade was being echoed by eminent 
intellectuals, including Professor AE Freeman, also a stalwart of the 
Liberal party, and Goldwin Smith, professor of history at Oxford. In 
addition to claiming that money-grubbing Jews exploited Christian guilt 
over past oppression (such as the Inquisition) and controlled the press, 
Smith declaimed that Jews could not be loyal citizens because "their 
only country is their race; which is one with their religion".
While he would no doubt dismiss the comparison, 134 years later this is 
exactly what Sir Miles is banging on about. Either he thinks it is a 
problem that Jews are serving on the Iraq inquiry because they have a 
dual loyalty or he thinks that less enlightened folk than him in the 
Arab world might draw this conclusion. The first possibility is 
dismaying but the alternative is no cause for relief. His response to 
the existence of bigotry is not to pour scorn on prejudice and defend 
the integrity of public servants who happen to be Jewish, but to appease it.
This suspicion of Jews is ingrained in certain quarters of Britain's 
ruling class but it is not only the Jews who should be concerned. 
Muslims, Hindus, Roman Catholics and members of every minority should 
pay attention to the implications. If the religious affiliation or 
origin of members of the Iraq inquiry is relevant because it may be used 
against the inquiry or taken to explain its shortcomings, what of other 
departments of state and government agencies?
Are Muslims to be barred from the Ministry of Defence or Home Office 
lest a terrorist outrage be perpetrated by a Muslim? After all, someone 
might say: this is what happens if you put Muslims in charge of our 
security. Are immigrants or the children of immigrants to be banned from 
working in the immigration services? It would indeed be embarrassing if 
there was a mishap in the controls and the minister responsible was, 
heaven forbid of "immigrant stock". What would the BNP say? And surely 
we can't trust Northern Ireland in the hands of a Roman Catholic, in 
case something goes wrong. Or a Protestant for that matter.
You can see where this argument is leading. Of course, Sir Miles and 
those who think like him may object that it is only this inquiry and 
these Jews that present the problem. But then you can see where that 
argument leads, too.

 Britain's affair with antisemitism
vi ricordate quando Leonard Zanardo studiava in Britain?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS4gz_qhy6w