Jeremy
Corbyn has serious question to answer about his commitment to democracy. That’s
quite an assertion, but one I think the evidence supports. Let me be entirely
clear – Jeremy Corbyn is not an enemy of, or a threat to, British democracy.
Nor is he ideologically opposed to democratic institutions – he’s not a
revolutionary Marxist. But he has defended, and associated with, a concerning
number of ultra-authoritarian regimes. In short he has defended enough that,
whilst I don’t doubt his commitment to democracy in the UK, it’s far from clear
that he supports it in all developing countries. Some of the regimes he has
defended have been of the left – most notably the ‘communist’ dictatorship
which rules Cuba and the authoritarian left-wing Government which controls
Venezuela. But some aren’t. He has also defended ultra-authoritarian Governments
of the far-right, in particular those of Iran, Hamas and Hezbullah (which can
reasonably be treated as a Government on the basis that it de facto controls
parts of Southern Lebanon). These regimes have little in common with Corbyn’s
ideology, beyond opposition to ‘Western’ values and institutions.
I’ll start
with Corbyn’s more ideologically explicable, if no less morally indefensible,
association with ultra-authoritarian Governments of the far-left. Corbyn is a
longstanding supporter of the Cuban Solidarity Campaign (CSC), a British group
which supports the Cuban Government. Indeed, on 11 July 2016, the day when
Theresa May became Prime Minister, Corbyn chose to address a CSC meeting in
Parliament. Unfortunately Cuba is an authoritarian dictatorship – its
Government persecutes political opponents, including independent labour
organisations. Amnesty International reports
that ‘government critics, including journalists and human rights
activists’ are ‘routinely subjected to arbitrary arrests’, with the Cuban
Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation reporting that 8,600 politically motivated detentions
occurred last year. Amnesty also notes that the Government controls
‘access to the internet…limiting access to information and criticism of the
state’, whilst subjecting critics to ‘politically motivated criminal
prosecutions’. Corbyn needs to explain why he hasn’t just defended an
authoritarian dictatorship, but gone out of his way to do so.
Corbyn
didn’t just vocally support the government of Cuba, he also supported its
authoritarian counterpart in Venezuela. Now admittedly Venezuela isn’t quite a
dictatorship of the Cuban model, but it’s no liberal-democracy either. Amnesty
International’s 2015/16 report
on global human rights stated that ‘Human rights defenders and journalists
continued to face attacks and intimidation. Political opponents of the
government faced unfair trials and imprisonment’. Corbyn though had a rather
more rosy view of the Venezuelan Government, and in June 2015 lavished it with
praise as he addressed a rally of the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign, a
left-wing pro-Chavez group. Once again he went out of his way to support an
authoritarian regime, and one which had a track record of taking its country in
a more autocratic direction.
Corbyn was also
prepared, on 1 June this year, to address a May Day rally in London which
featured multiple communist flags, including those of the CPGB (Communist Party
of Great Britain), and even banners depicting Lenin and Stalin. Perhaps Corbyn
didn’t see the Communist flags. Perhaps he doesn’t have eyes. In any case an
ardent democrat would clearly object to having communist flags waved in
support, in the same manner that they would if flags of the British Union of
Fascists were flow. But Corbyn didn’t. It’s inconceivable that even a junior
Conservative backbencher would address a rally featuring fascist flags, and
portraits of Mussolini or General Franco. And yet the Labour leader is prepared
to address a rally featuring Communist flags and banners of Bolshevik tyrants.
As I
mentioned earlier Corbyn doesn’t just associate with Governments of the
authoritarian left. Even more shockingly, he is prepared to defend those of the
radical (usually religiously fundamentalist) right. Take for example Iran.
Corbyn has been a regular on the state funded Iranian Government propaganda
channel Press TV. This isn’t a TV station which happens to be based in Iran,
it’s one which actively promotes the positions of the Iranian Government. And
the Iranian Government is a dictatorship, one which butchered pro-democracy protestors
in 2009. It’s a Government that believes homosexuality should be prohibited,
sometimes even punished by death, and that the state should regulate what women
can wear. It is, in short, an
appallingly reactionary religiously conservative dictatorship. Any true
defender of democracy and human rights would run a mile. And yet Corbyn does
the opposite. In 2012 he even spoke at an Al-Quds day rally in London, Al-Quads
day being the annual event initiated by Ayatollah Khomeini to protest against
Israel. Hezbollah flags, and other extremist symbols, are regular features of
these rallies.
Corbyn has
also had associations with Hamas and Hezbullah, the Palestinian and Lebanese
Islamist groups which rule Gaza (as a dictatorship) and parts of Lebanon
(though unofficially). Corbyn has referred
to representatives of both groups as his ‘friends’, and invited them to
meetings. Hamas is institutionally anti-Semitic, and runs Gaza as a theocratic
dictatorship. According to that neo-conservative stalwart Amnesty International,
Hamas in Gaza restricts ‘freedom of expression, including by arresting and
detailing critics and political opponents’. It has also ‘used force to disperse
some protests’, whilst ‘torture and other ill-treatment of detainees is
relatively common’. Both Hamas and Hezbullah deliberately target civilians,
predominantly Israeli, during periods of conflict. And yet Corbyn has described
them as ‘friends’ of his own free will. He was under no pressure to do so. It’s
not like when Conservative Cabinet Ministers are compelled, for diplomatic
reasons, to find warm words for authoritarian regimes. Corbyn chose to do so, and it’s revealing
that of all the regimes in the Middle East he has associated with some of the
most authoritarian, whilst reserving his sharpest criticism for the country,
Israel, which has the strongest democratic and liberal institutions.
So Corbyn
has serious questions concerning his commitment to democracy – and so far he
has singularly failed to address them. Whilst there’s no suggestion that he’s
ideologically opposed to democracy, or in any way a threat to democracy in the
UK, he has chosen to defend and associate with a worrying number of dictatorial
regimes. Some of these have been on the hard-left, others the far-right.
Nothing unites them beyond a dislike, which Corbyn at least partly shares, of
the ‘West’ and its values. Corbyn’s opponents for the Labour leadership need to
draw attention to this, and make it clear that he’s not just (fortuitously)
unelectable. His past associations make him morally unacceptable as leader.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.