You are here: Home » Comment »

Jim Murphy and the British neo-cons

February 13, 2013 3:44 pm

Author:

Ben Soffa

Share this Article

What would be the response if it were discovered that a senior Shadow Minister was to make a keynote speech at a thinktank whose Associate Director had previously said, “Conditions for Jews in Europe must be made harder across the board“? Quite rightfully, all hell would break loose, the event cancelled, apologies issued and people would say it set the party back.

Yet swap ‘Jews’ for ‘Muslims’ in the above and that’s who will be hosting a keynote speech by Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy this Thursday.

Thinktanks obviously debate a range of ideas and host or publish all kinds of thinkers, but this is not the case here. The Henry Jackson Society, who have been chosen to host Jim Murphy’s speech on “A New Model for Intervention” must regard their Associate Directory Douglas Murray as their most high profile staff member and a key driver of their politics.

Nor is his shocking quote an aberration from an otherwise mainstream organisation. Murray (author of ‘Neoconservatism: Why We Need It’) is very much at home in an organisation whose former European Neighbourhood Section Director has said “No longer is it a centrist, bipartisan think-tank…Instead, it has become an abrasively right-wing forum with an anti-Muslim tinge…[that] panders to a narrow readership of extreme Europhobic British Tories, hardline US Republicans and Israeli Likudniks.”

On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the vast anti-war march, it is a cruel irony that a Labour shadow minister will be hosted by an organisation who still enthusiastically support the neo-con agenda now widely understood to have been a disaster for the Party (and the world).

It was the decisive rejection of this approach which has allowed Labour under Ed Miliband to reconnect with many who became estranged from the Party in the aftermath of Iraq. Whilst not knowing what Jim will outline, it is hardly a positive sign that Labour’s policy on protecting human rights the world over will be outlined in a speech to an outfit that champions unilateral approaches and seems to have learned little from the disaster of Iraq.

With the tenth anniversary of the Iraq war looming and the undoubtedly uncomfortable publication of the Chilcot Inquiry expected next year, all of Labour’s frontbench must be clear that there can be no rehabilitation of the politics which led us to some very dark places. Labour needs an outward-looking, engaged foreign policy which appreciates Britain’s place in an increasingly multi-polar world. The neo-cons of the Henry Jackson Society should have no role in it.

John Reid

having been on the next generation labour website and , the only criticism I could see they had was they don’t like criticism of the Venesualan government, I can’t see why the author here has a problem with him Murphy talking to the Henry Jackson society and as for the alleged comment about Muslims not being acceptable if it were about Jews, I find this strange the anti semeticism some of the left that Jeremy Corbin surrounds himself, is a lot worse. The relevance of the anniversary of Iraq is irrelevantly too,
volcanopete

The Labour party is at its best when adopting a zero tolerance stance against islamophobia and racism of all kinds.Jim Murphy would be well advised to reconsider.
JoeDM

Have I strayed onto the SWP website by mistake?
- http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone
  
  Before you get over excited about ‘liberal intervention’ perhaps you’d like to consider the views of U.S. patriot Chalmers Johnson:
  
  http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/27/chalmers_johnson_nemesis_the_last_days
- http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone
  
  Before you get over excited about ‘liberal intervention’ perhaps you’d like to consider the views of U.S. patriot Chalmers Johnson:
  
  http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/27/chalmers_johnson_nemesis_the_last_days
  - JoeDM
    
    Why do you think I would be excited about “liberal intervention”? It was, after all, a central plank of the last Labour Government’s foreign policy.
    - http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone
      
      Distinguished political philosopher Shaldon Wolin* is worth a look also. One just wishes Murphy and his chums would drop the fake-statesman posturing and actually do some homework.
      
      * http://www.thenation.com/article/inverted-totalitarianism
- David Lindsay
  
  No, onto one allied to a previously almost forgotten organisation called the Labour Party. Is Jim Murphy in it? Not if he appears at the HJS, no.
http://twitter.com/rob_marchant Rob Marchant

They may be neocons, if that is what they want to be called. They do not seem to be racists, as you infer. And everyone who supports intervention is not a “neocon”, whatever that means.
- Guest
  
  Rob, do you think it likely that someone who writes a whole book called ‘Neoconservatism: Why We Need It’ might indeed be a neoconservative? I don’t think I’m unfairly labeling him here.
  
  Have you glanced at the first link above. It’s far from just the one line – e.g. “No European country’s Muslim population is currently higher than 10% – which ordinarily would be alright – not ideal, but alright.” Not ideal? Too many Muslims – not Islamists, not fundamentalists, not terrorists, but Muslims. Might this suggest he has a problem with, oh, let’s see, Muslims?
  
  Would you think that sentence acceptable if the size of a country’s Jewish community were being discussed, or would you then recognise it for what it clearly is?
- BenSoffa
  
  Rob, do you think it fair to assume that the person who wrote the book ‘Neoconservatism: Why We Need It’ might indeed be a supporter of neoconservatism and has a definite view on what it is?
  
  Does this quote (from the same speech as linked above) strike you as Islamophobic:
  “So it is worth reminding ourselves of the basics of the problem. No European country’s Muslim population is currently higher than 10% – which ordinarily would be alright – not ideal, but alright.”
  
  ‘Not ideal’ – remember he’s talking about ‘Muslims’ – not fundamentalists, Islamists, terrorists etc. but Muslims. As I Jew, I know I’d consider that to be racist if said against my community. I think it’s no less hateful when said about anyone else – maybe you disagree?
Brumanuensis

A shame they couldn’t have gone the way of the Project for the New American Century.
robertcp

I would never vote for anyone that supported the Iraq war. I will never forget the sickening feeling when I realised that Blair and Straw were lying when they said that war was not inevitable. Fortunately, the Labour MP in my constituency opposed the war.
Daniel Speight

From what’s already been released it seems Murphy’s speech will be along the lines of ‘do as I say, not what I did.’

Will it be a mea culpa or just the archetypal apparatchik trimming his sales to the party’s latest positions?
franwhi

When the speech he should be making is scrap Trident and Trident defence spending – we can ill-afford this macho posturing. Shame
Chilbaldi

There will always be this element in the Labour Party, I fear. The ‘we must never ever intervene even if people are being slaughtered and we should disband the army tomorrow’ branch.
- http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone
  
  Come, come now – a ridiculous exaggeration does your position no good at all.
  
  What I find interesting is that the old traditional right and the young new left have now found common cause in opposition to military adventures that, as Johnson and Wolin argue, will eventually destroy what most believe they are intended to protect.
  
  A new form of patriotism has been born.
Monkey_Bach

Isn’t Murphy the guy who wanted to subject all benefit claimants to lie detector tests? Eeek.
http://twitter.com/rob_marchant Rob Marchant

First of all, you have mistakenly asserted that I was questioning whether or not he is a “neocon”. If he calls himself one, then I think we can all assume he is one – whatever that means. But you have argued against a point which I did not make.

Second, I think there are lot of people in today’s Britain who are racist. There is the BNP. There are some members of far-left organisations. There are clearly members of all three major parties. But I struggle to see Douglas Murray, who comes across as a thoughtful person – albeit one whose views I usually disagree with – as a racist.

It is very easy to call someone a racist, but I feel you require a little more evidence than you have provided for what is a very strong charge (I should add that Murray could, by the way, very likely sue you and win, if he so chose).

That is not a partisan statement in any way, by the way – I am, after all, on the left and he is clearly on the right – but I believe we all deserve for people to phrase their criticisms a little less sweepingly, and at least not libellously, if they are to be credible.
- BenSoffa
  
  So from your defence of him, is it safe to assume you think the two quotes from his own speech, as formerly published on his own website, are within the realms of acceptable debate? Is it OK – not necessarily correct, but OK – to claim the size of the Muslim population is “not ideal, but alright”?
  
  Again, if the comments had been about my own Jewish community, I think people would see this as a pretty straightforward question.
  
  I’ve met and shared a platform with the man (to oppose each others positions) – he was perfectly charming. At no point have I claimed that he is a racist person. I have merely noted two quotes which he put on his website, one of which, if it had been aimed at the Jewish community, I have said I would regard as racist. If he wishes to draw far wider attention to these comments and limit debate in this area, I have no doubt he is aware of some very good lawyers.
http://twitter.com/rob_marchant Rob Marchant

First of all, you have mistakenly asserted that I was questioning whether or not he is a “neocon”. If he calls himself one, then I think we can all assume he is one – whatever that means. But you have argued against a point which I did not make.

Second, I think there are lot of people in today’s Britain who are racist. There is the BNP. There are some members of far-left organisations. There are clearly members of all three major parties. But I struggle to see Douglas Murray, who comes across as a thoughtful person – albeit one whose views I usually disagree with – as a racist.

It is very easy to call someone a racist, but I feel you require a little more evidence than you have provided for what is a very strong charge (I should add that Murray could, by the way, very likely sue you and win, if he so chose).

That is not a partisan statement in any way, by the way – I am, after all, on the left and he is clearly on the right – but I believe we all deserve for people to phrase their criticisms a little less sweepingly, and at least not libellously, if they are to be credible.
http://twitter.com/youngian67 Ian Young

Another prominent Henry Jackson Society supporter is Gisela Stuart who Douglas Alexander reminded an audience, following his EU speech last month, was the only Labour MP to back Bush’s re-election.

Rather like the old Tory Monday Club in the 70s hanging onto dreams of post imperial
federation, these are the last of the Labour Atlanticists who hanker after a junior role in Washington to try and temper the worst excesses of American power and towards a more morally driven Blairite/Gladstonian liberal interventionism.

The concept has little traction under Obama’s administration and even the Tories are
becoming resigned to an Anglo-French led European defence and diplomatic strategy.
- http://twitter.com/waterwards dave stone
  
  “these are the last of the Labour Atlanticists ”
  
  But the game has only just begun. Yesterday, Murphy turned crowd-pleaser and assured his audience of Labour’s willingness to partake in further military adventures – promising to fund “strong supportive expeditionary capability and enablers alongside force protection. C4-ISTAR, naval resources, unmanned technology, helicopters, airlift, close air support and refuelling capabilities”.*
  
  Remember when Blair and Bush were hailed in Murdoch’s tabloids, in the run-up to the Iraq catastrophe, as the Churchill and Roosevelt of the 21st Century? Well, it looks as if Murphy is attempting to achieve similar ‘credibility’.
  
  * http://www.labour.org.uk/how-the-uk-responds-to-extremism-in-north-west-africa-and-beyond,2013-02-14

Latest

News
Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

Labour MPs will be encouraged to back this amendment – rather than that of Tory backbencher Tim Loughton – today: House of Commons Monday 20 May 2013 CONSIDERATION OF BILL New Amendments handed in are marked thus * MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL MANUSCRIPT AMENDMENT (a) As an Amendment to Secretary Maria Miller’s proposed New Clause (Review of civil partnership) (NC16):- Kate Green (a)(a * Line 8, leave out from ‘practicable’ to end of Clause, and insert ‘and include a [...]
Read more →
News
Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

By Mark Ferguson

In his interview with the Observer yesterday, Ed Miliband singled out Google as a company who aren’t “living up to their responsibilities” on tax, saying: ” I don’t think [Google] are living up to their responsibilities at the moment, and I will be very clear about that on Wednesday. It is part of a culture of irresponsibility. If everyone approaches their tax affairs as some of these companies have approached their tax affairs we wouldn’t have a health service, we wouldn’t [...]
Read more →
Comment Europe
Until Cameron spells out exactly what he wants to “renegotiate”, we’re all “Don’t Knows” on the Europe question

By Kevin Doran

The rift in the Conservative Party over the European Union has blown wide open and now threatens to consume the party in all-out civil war. Cameron’s set-piece speech on Europe where he announced that he would hold an In-Out Referendum by 2017 was supposed to put the matter to bed. It was a carefully thought-out calculation but instead of keeping euro-sceptics off his back, it has only fuelled the flames of dissent. Eur0-sceptic rebels in his parliamentary party have forced [...]
Read more →
News
Eric Joyce threatens Falkirk by-election over “entryism” concerns – Media roundup: May 20th, 2013

Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. Eric Joyce threatens Falkirk by-election over “entryism” concerns “Labour could face a potentially damaging by-election in Falkirk unless it sorts out the controversies and confusions that have surrounded its selection process, party leaders were warned last night. Eric Joyce, the [...]
Read more →
Featured
Why are the Tories putting a price on loving commitment?

By Mark Ferguson

So here we are again. Gay Marriage. Civil Partnerships. And a Tory rebellion. Except this time it’s different. Tim Loughton’s amendment calling for Civil Partnerships to be extended to heterosexual couples is being branded a “wrecking amendment” and could – bizarrely – see anti-gay rights Tories like David Jones voting the same way as staunch defenders of equal rights on the Labour benches. The argument being put forward by the Tory leadership is that granting such rights would delay the [...]
Read more →