- Vicki Robinson
The UK is an increasingly wide-ranging society. Followers of all the world's major religions are represented in the population, and a multitude of languages are spoken here, including Polish, Gujarati, Arabic and Chinese. It is a huge strength, with the potential to expand our understanding of the diverse range of cultures that make up humanity. During times of international crisis, the UK population is a wonderful resource that can help all citizens deepen their comprehension of what is happening around the world.
This can also be tricky, as we are currently seeing with the unfolding Middle East crisis. Since World War II, British identity has been closely associated with defeating the Nazis, and the pivotal role of British forces in liberating Jewish people from concentration camps profoundly influences our self-perception. This period in our history is also complex, given the Balfour Declaration and Britain’s role in the creation of the State of Israel. Today, the UK has a longstanding commitment to a two-state solution.
At a UN Security Council meeting on the Middle East peace process in 2022, Ambassador Barbara Woodward stated that:
“The UK firmly believes that a two-state solution, based on 1967 lines, with Jerusalem as a shared capital and a just solution for refugees is the best way to deliver long-term peace.”
The horrifying events of the 7th October massacre could have been an opportunity for increased understanding of a conflict dating back millennia. People with ancestral roots in the area could have led the conversation, along with experts in the subject, opening new perspectives. The potential for objectivity is at its highest when a wide range of opinions are taken into account.
Instead, alarming anti-Israeli demonstrations with pro-terrorist posters on display, have dominated the UK and other liberal democracies. Chants of, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” are heard. As is so often the case these days, this slogan claims multiple interpretations, with some seeing it as a demand for an end to occupation in the West Bank, and others arguing that it is an antisemitic slogan relating to the elimination of Israel. Hamas’ reference to it in its 2017 Charter, along with a glance at a map, makes its chilling meaning clear.
The situation is concerning, and it is easy to feel powerless, especially given the moral prevarications of so many of our institutions. In particular, the BBC has received criticism for bizarrely refusing to call Hamas a terrorist group. Over 2,000 people from across the arts, including Tilda Swinton and Steve Coogan, signed an open letter that condemned Israel but not Hamas. Reports have also emerged of Civil Servants resisting Downing Street orders to fly the Israeli flag.
Away from larger institutions, however, many positive spaces have been created with the aim of bringing people together. The Equiano Project is an obvious example, and recently released a statement condemning antisemitism. The new media ecosystem, notably UnHerd with its club offering talks and discussion, is another. The West-Eastern Divan Orchestra has been bringing together talented Israeli and Arab musicians together since 1999. Focusing on our common humanity makes a difference. Even the smallest contribution can help. I recently contacted a Jewish friend that I had not seen for years to ask her how she was.
Universalism, not tribalism, offers a path forward. Even when things seem bleak, it can encourage everyone to pay attention to what unites us, opening the potential for more productive conversations around challenging issues. Recent weeks have brutally revealed the destructiveness of dividing people into oppressor/oppressed categories.
It is particularly important in bringing people of different religions together. All faiths have universalist aspects that can unite people during times of conflict, notably Hinduism. Small organisations, such as the more esoteric Beshara Trust which supports “the advancement of education in the consideration of the basic unity of all religions,” are making positive contributions. The UK is also fortunate to have a king who describes himself as Defender of the Faiths, and who recently stressed the importance of mutual understanding, stating that, “The instinct to cooperate wherever and whenever possible is deep within us.”
Focusing on unity is imperative for harmony of the UK. In 2022, violent unrest between British Hindus and British Muslims in Leicester, a city known as a model for cohesion, showed how easily conflict can flare up. Dr Rakib Ehsan, a recent guest on EquianoPod, stated in his recent newsletter that:
“A critical part of managing diversity is ensuring that foreign conflicts do not destabilise British community relations. The absence of a meaningful national integration strategy demonstrates how this issue has been a 'policy orphan' in British politics – and we are paying a hefty price.”
Indeed. Institutions must be challenged to resist tribalism and bring people together with a positive vision. Here is mine. I hold on to a vision of Jews and Palestinians living alongside each other in peace, no matter how naïve this seems at the moment. I also envisage the United Kingdom as a place where deep-seated wounds are healed. Recent events have been a wake-up call for many people, and have the potential to be a turning point to a better future. We must all contribute to this in whatever way we can.
Vicki is a writer from England's border with Wales. Her main interests are politics, arts and culture. She is also a keen amateur potter and sculptor.
You can follow Vicki on Twitter, @storiesopinions
More content on our YouTube channel. Don’t forget to Subscribe.
Liberalism was born out of conflict, presupposes conflict and devises means of managing conflict.
We can aspire to universal ideals such as 'universalism' but conflict is inevitable.
I have a concrete example that may be relevant to this publication. In 2021 the government published a paper called the 'Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities'. This report challenged what seemed to many of us to be the prevailing view that British society was 'institutionally racist' and argued for a more constructive and optimistic vision for the education of our young people. The response to the report was hostile, one critic dismissed the report as 'historically illiterate' and worse. I don't want to personalise things, but I caricatured this as a tribal conflict, I called the two side 'the Sewellites' and 'the Olusogas'.
It seemed to me and still does that the Olusogas held the winning hand. It seems that within the establishment there is a tendency to be seduced by the more militant side. We can speculate about this. Malcolm X famously said that 'the only thing power respects is power', Machiavelli said 'it's better to be feared than loved'. For their part the Sewellites failed to win over popular support. For me, while I would support the perspective of the Sewellites, as far as I was concerned this was a conflict between two sets of media and academic types, the kind of people who need to know your qualifications, your CV and/or your celebrity status before they will have a conversation with you.
If you were only familiar with black people via the mainstream media, you could be forgiven for thinking that they were all one big happy family. There has been a failure to recognise genuine difference and issues of principle. We can remember the universal support of the media. political and celebrity establishments for black lives matter and the disregard for those of us who were wary or critical of it.
Within the UK we have the institutionalisation of difference, for example the equality act which includes 'Race' as a protected characteristic. Within our public institutions you will find a commitment to 'racial equality'. I know that the Equiano project is uneasy with the use of the term 'Race', you might want to send that message on to the Government and the Civil Service.
Is tribalism then, just diversity that we do not like? While multiculturalism is diversity that we do like?
The UK establishment supports black lives matter, black history month and other black prefixes? So what does 'black' represent today? Is it culture? It can't be, given the cultural diversity within 'blackness'. It seems to resemble 'race', black is our contemporary term for 'negro'. I agree that universalism as a humanistic aim is a good one, I even support it. In reality I wouldn't say it is a lost cause but it's a challenge. Not everyone wants universalism.
Thank you for this simple, wonderful article.