Can you recall the number times the proponents of the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism assured everybody that in no way would it hinder any genuine criticism of Israeli policies against the Palestinians?
Tower Hamlets council staff cancelled a charity event raising funds in aid of Palestinian children because they alleged that there was a “real risk” that the event and its organisers could be seen to have breached the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism because of references on their website to Israel's apartheid and ethnic cleansing policies. A situation made worse by the Tower Hamlets council staff insisting upon keeping their reasons for their cancellation secret.
One official said there were concerns “not least because of the recent furour [sic] within the Labour party over Anti Semitism”.
So those who said the guidelines would be used against critics of Israeli government policy, despite assurances to the contrary, have been vindicated.
But will the advocates of those guidelines now express condemnation of its mis-use? Will are all those organisations condemning the Labour Party of anti-semitism because of the reluctance to accept the IHRA guidelines now speak up in its defence since the concern of their implementation has been shown to have been sincere?
I think we all know the answer.