Speaking to a large gathering of Muslim MPs, activists, and community leaders during a Ramadan iftar ceremony at Westminster Hall on Tuesday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer emphasized that the United Kingdom had played no role in the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran and would not take part in any future offensive action against Tehran.
He also praised British Muslims as “the face of modern Britain,” thanked them for their “immense contribution” to the country, and blamed “far-right rhetoric and misinformation” for what he described as a wave of anti-Muslim hatred.
Empathizing with the group, he said he understood this was a “very difficult time” for them because of the “pain of the conflict in Gaza” and the “suffering of Palestinians.”
Additionally, even though a British military base in Cyprus was among the first targets of the Iranian regime’s retaliatory strikes, Starmer expressed sympathy over the death of Ayatollah Khamenei.
He concluded his speech with the words “Ramadan Mubarak,” which means “Blessed Ramadan” in Arabic.
Yes, his remarks were absolutely shameless, but the Muslim community constitutes a significant portion of his political base.
On Friday, The Spectator’s political editor Tim Shipman reported he’d obtained a draft copy of “Protecting What Matters, a document outlining Labour’s new cohesion strategy which is to be unveiled in a cross government push next week.” Among the new initiatives, Starmer will appoint a “special representative on anti-Muslim hostility,” or what Shipman refers to as an “Islamophobia tsar.”
[Note: Shipman’s article is behind a paywall, but can be viewed here.]
The 47-page government paper proposes stronger measures against extremism. To the document’s credit, it identifies Islamists as the primary threat to community cohesion and even calls for new immigrants to integrate and speak English.
The paper acknowledges that antisemitism has become “normalized in many corners of society – from our schools and universities to workplaces and the NHS.”
It also admits that, for many U.K. residents, “the changes brought about by mass migration have been too much, too quickly, leaving people feeling as thought they are losing their local and national identity.” While calling on U.K. citizens to have “respect for different cultures,” it notes that “newcomers have a responsibility to engage with and embrace what it means to be British.”
So, all of that is progress.
However, while the document rejects demands for blasphemy laws, it pledges to protect individuals from intimidation over alleged “blasphemy.” One can only wonder what the Starmer government will consider to be intimidation and how precisely it plans to protect those who are intimidated.
The plan also seeks expanded powers to shut down “extremist charities,” bar hate preachers, increase monitoring of extremism in universities, and prevent public institutions from funding or legitimizing extremist groups. It includes new rules to confront “divisive content” and “ensure trusted news sources are prominent.”
Given the arrests and jail sentences handed down for social media posts in recent years — and the pandering address to the Muslim community delivered by the prime minister on Tuesday — concerns about the proposed reforms are hardly misplaced. The fear is that the new measures, including the creation of an anti-Muslim hostility tsar to enforce them, could further restrict free speech in the U.K.
Shipman cites some specific concerns:
Critics fear these measures will be used to silence critics of Islamists or even TV channels like GB News which some Labour people view as too right-wing….The creation of a ‘special representative on anti-Muslim hostility’ is likely to give a prominent platform to an activist voice. Their job will be to ‘champion efforts across the UK to tackle hostility and hatred directed at Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim’.Alongside that is a new definition of anti-Muslim hatred, which has been watered down to avoid defining Muslims as a race, but which will still condemn ‘the prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims, as part of a collective group with set characteristics, to stir up hatred against them, irrespective of their actual opinions, beliefs or actions as individuals’. Critics think this will create a blasphemy law by the back door….It also states that everyone must ‘embrace’ LGBT rights, opening the door to censure of those whose religious views are hostile to homosexuality and those who do not embrace trans rights. Ministers will also float the idea of religious education in the national curriculum and suggests the government should ‘promote’ religious education councils.
Asked for comment on the new proposals, Andrew Gilligan, a senior fellow at Policy Exchange and a former No. 10 adviser, told the Spectator: “There are clear risks to free speech. But there are also several worthwhile commitments, if they ever happen. The risk is that the bad things happen, and the good ones do not. The other risk is that the new strategy is implemented by the same old identity-politics activists, woolly-minded councillors and 40-watt policemen who have made the current mess.”
The paper does contain some long-overdue acknowledgments about the challenges posed by mass migration. But the initiative’s success — or failure — will depend on how these measures are enforced. If the same political instincts that produced Starmer’s pandering Ramadan address guide its implementation, many Britons will fear that the promised reforms will serve less to defend cohesion than to police dissent.
Finally, sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words!
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY