Jeremy Corbyn's leadership bid was supposed to inspire debate, yet none of the other candidates have challenged him on foreign policy
Jeremy Corbyn’s latest opinion on foreign policy is that the UK should show more respect to Vladimir Putin’s Russia.
Like his other announcements, they are going unchallenged by his rivals in the Labour leadership contest.
Like French far-right leader Marine Le Penn and UKIP leader Nigel Farage, Corbyn thinks that NATO, rather than Vladimir Putin, is at fault for the crisis in Ukraine.
Indeed, Stop the War Coalition, of which Corbyn is chair, regularly pushes pieces so blinkered they could well have been written by the Kremlin itself, such as the ridiculously titled ‘Why the United States launched its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.’
Moreover, Corbyn expressed regret that Poland was allowed to join NATO, claiming that, ‘We should have gone down the road Ukraine went down in 1990’ (because that has worked out so well).
There’s more. Corbyn’s associations with anti-Semites include: his ‘friends’ Hamas and Hezbollah, his praise for a blood-libel-spreading, 9/11 conspiracy theorist Islamist preacher, who he even invited to take tea on the terrace of the House of Commons, moonlighting for George Galloway on Iranian government propaganda channel Press TV, allegedly donating money to a pressure group run by a holocaust denier and deemed too extreme by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and defending a priest who shared on social media an article entitled ‘9/11: Israel did it’.
As far as I am aware, none of the current Labour leadership contenders have sought to challenge Corbyn’s views on these issues.
It is staggering that Labour Party figures accuse Corbyn of wanting to return to the days of British Leyland or a ‘Soviet-style’ economy simply for wanting to bring the railways into public ownership (something Andy Burnham claims to support), but will say nothing about his repeated association with anti-Semitic figures or his anti-NATO, pro-Russia, pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah stances.
Even in Alistair Campbell’s blog urging people to vote for anyone but Corbyn, there is no proper attempt to challenge Corbyn’s ideology; he simply says Corbyn would be bad for the Labour Party.
If Corbyn can still be defeated it will only be through convincing the party members and supporters why he is wrong – not simply saying he is wrong over and over again.
Whether one agrees with him or not, to the vast majority of people Corbyn comes across as a genuine character, with deeply held convictions (and a record for being the most rebellious Labour MP to back this up). He speaks to Labour members and supporters outraged by the fact the party leadership made such a mess on the welfare bill. Like them, he opposed it and like them, he does not want to tack further to the right.
It is perfectly understandable that party members and supporters are more inclined to vote for someone who comes across as a conviction politician – someone who talks about wanting to turn the party back into a social movement – rather than vote for someone based on whether or not the Tories will fear them.
Put bluntly, people voting for Corbyn know he will not do a Nick Clegg.
By contrast, rival candidates come across as though they are continuing Ed Miliband’s strategy of Balkanising voters: thinking that if they can simply say the right thing to different groups of supporters then they will secure their nominations – clearly this did not work for Ed and is failing epically at present.
There are very serious arguments to be had over many of Corbyn’s views and it’s puzzling that his rival candidates haven’t offered a more extensive critique of them; simply attempting to scare party members into not voting for Corbyn, just saying that he is bad, has failed.
Several MPs claimed they were backing Corbyn not because they support him, but in order to ‘broaden the debate.’ Even at this late stage, can we actually have that debate?
Lorin Bell-Cross is a researcher at BICOM and assistant editor of Fathom Journal. He is writing in a personal capacity. Follow him on Twitter.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
241 Responses to “Why is no one challenging Jeremy Corbyn on foreign policy?”
Dee
Is this NATO that you speak of the same organization who are fine with Turkey killing Kurds and supporting Islamists?
Joe Ballard
Yeah, he really doesn’t support Islamic terrorism, the IRA or Russian Military aggression. However if you announce solidarity for those fighting oppression in Palestine, believe that Ireland should be able to rule itself or suggest that diplomacy should be based on good relations not hawkish military threats and sanctions on people then you’ll be branded as a supporter of terrorism by the right wing media.
subtleknife666
Why would you want Corbyn to support the Zionist entity in occupied Palestine, the so-called “State of Israel” which is a violent, murdering, fascist apartheid pseudo-state?
By the way, the definition of Nazism is fascism plus racism. So, ironically, the people of Israel who suffered so horribly from Nazism in Europe are now running their own Nazi “state” on land they have stolen from the people who were already living there.
David Lindsay
Kosovo is a cesspit of heroin trafficking, people trafficking, staggering corruption, neo-Nazism, Islamism and Hoxhism.
verticalaudio
Exactly how many documented associations with anti-Semitic individuals and groups does it take for a Labour MP – let alone a leadership candidate – to warrant an investigation on grounds of bringing the party into disrepute?
The total silence from the Labour Party sends the most appalling message. The amount of obsessive anti Israel and anti Semitic comment/abuse flying around on social media at the moment should be a cause of Labour and national concern and shame. And yet there is complete silence both from the party and the “liberal” media – BBC included. All this serves to legitimise the hate that the left has indulged in for so long.
There is no longer any pretence at supporting the hatred with a cogent, rational and empirically evidenced argument. “Anti-Zionism” is simply a given truth to huge swathes of Corbyn supporters, though the vast majority of them would probably struggle to locate Israel on a map, let alone set out the logic of their position.
A minority – 0.5% of the UK population – is under attack and individual Jews have spoken out. Yet instead of the liberal and left establishments reacting strongly to investigate and mitigate, there is a deafening silence. This will probably go down as the UK’s 21st Century Dreyfus moment for future generations. And it is to the shame of the Party, the liberal establishment and to all who fail to show solidarity with those who are under attack.
Cue the inevitable tirade of attacks on this comment which will all include the line “I’m not an anti-Semite, but………..”
Shame on you.