130 days of genocide, 130 days of losing trust in British politics

What, actually, is the job of a politician? Is it to represent their constituents, to navigate their nation in the turbulent global times, or is it all about gaining power?

Those are perhaps the questions a lecturer would ask their first-year politics students in an undergraduate class. Regardless of the answer, UK politicians have largely failed at their job over the past 130 days.

Five months ago, it was clear that the Labour party was very likely to win the next general elections. We trusted that this act of democracy will bring an end to almost 13 years of Tory rule. Those were 13 years of NHS destruction, a bad joke called Brexit, and countless scandals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

It was actually during the pandemic that I first started questioning British politics. As a student of immunology, I was perplexed with the anti-vaxxer movement. “The evidence for vaccination safety and efficacy is clear and simple”, I thought to myself.

"For decades, Britain has supported Israel as it stole land, built walls, burned farms, and restricted access to food and water for Palestinians. Such support is already a moral stain on our country"

It turns out that the problem wasn’t education of the masses as one might first think. It was the lack of trust that the British people have in government.

130 days of Israel’s deadly war on Gaza and I can see why. My whole generation can see why.

One would have hoped that the political response to Israel’s attacks on Gaza would be similar to that seen with Russia and its invasion of Ukraine. Practically no political figure in Britain called the situation “complicated”, and none dared to stand with the Russian side.

British anger towards Russia played on the fact that a military superpower is attacking an innocent neighbouring country. It was a David vs Goliath story. Britain stood against the big bad bully.

We stood for morality, or perhaps not. We now see our government blindly supporting a different bully. For decades, Britain has supported Israel as it stole land, built walls, burned farms, and restricted access to food and water for Palestinians. Such support is already a moral stain on our country.

"A man who can so quickly flip the switch on his stance on human rights is a man who should not be trusted in any position of power"@key48return on why Keir Starmer's Labour policies towards Gaza show he cannot be trusted in power 👇https://t.co/AETkgTDp4J

— The New Arab (@The_NewArab) January 23, 2024

Even if we were to forget this, and do Israel the massive courtesy of assuming history began on the 7th of October, we would condemn Hamas 695 times for each civilian killed and meet Israel with ~28,000 of the same.

The catastrophic loss of Gazan civilian life is usually justified by Israel and its Western allies as the necessary price to rid the world of Hamas and retrieve the Israeli hostages. Yet, after displacing 90% of Gazans and destroying half their infrastructure, Hamas is still firing rockets and the IDF has all but shot more hostages than it saved.

Here we have a colonial power indiscriminately bombing hospitals, schools, UN shelters, and refugee camps, with nothing to show for it. It sells this madness as fighting the “children of darkness”.

So what do Britain’s politicians say to that? Shockingly, their message has been largely homogenous across parliament. Most prominent party statements stood in complete support of Israel, condemning the Hamas attacks, and affirming support for the apartheid state to “defend itself”.

A homogenous stance on a controversial topic by opposing parties is quite unusual in politics. Typically, each political party would pick a side that caters to their archetypical voter.

The Conservative party’s foreign policy is “do what America does”. In the case of Israel, the White House shows unwavering and undeniable support to the apartheid state. It is also the case that many of the party’s most significant donors are staunchly in support of Israel. Rishi Sunak himself has investments in Israeli companies.

There are economic, political, and personal reasons for the Conservatives to support Israel in its genocide. Hardly a surprise, but still a disappointment. The ruling party of Britain is, once again, following America into committing war crimes.

Clearly some lessons are never learned.

"This was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me and so many other young Britons. Britain’s biggest opposition party no longer brought hope for change, but is now, sadly, a lesser of two evils"

Given that 76% of Britons support a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, this seemed like a golden opportunity for the Labour party to garner more support for the upcoming general elections.

Opposing the Conservative party line would give them a moral high ground that they have long claimed. Championing the colour of blood and heart, Labour has historically been associated with humane and sympathetic policies which aim to lead worker’s rights, eliminate poverty, and establish social reforms.

Their leader Keir Starmer claims “justice is my life’s work” on his party’s website. One would have, therefore, hoped that the workers party would stand with Britain’s youth and working class in demanding a ceasefire.

Yet, their response to the ongoing bombardment of Gaza was verbatim that of their blue siblings.

This was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me and so many other young Britons. Britain’s biggest opposition party no longer brought hope for change, but is now, sadly, a lesser of two evils.

In the face of the genocide of an entire population, the party led by a former human rights lawyer went as far as threatening punishment to any party MP voting for a ceasefire resolution in parliament.

By attempting to showcase his frail leadership qualities, Starmer forced many not to represent their constituents, thereby hampering a basic democratic process. Worse still, he essentially forced his party to become an active participant in the genocide of Gaza by preventing a call for peace.

The Liberal Democrats aren’t much better. While they do call for a ceasefire, it comes with conditions described by dozens of geopolitical experts as unrealistic. Ed Davey’s statement on the party’s website is contradictory and seemingly politically naive.

In it, he states that Hamas cannot be gotten rid of militarily. Yet, a ceasefire agreement must entail Hamas losing control of Gaza. If military action cannot eliminate Hamas, then what’s the other option?

Gaza can’t be sanctioned, it’s already a concentration camp. The only other option is to keep killing innocent civilians until Hamas gives up, which is a crime against humanity.

The Liberal Democrat statement does not put much responsibility on the Israeli side either. There are no calls for Netenyahu, or Likud leaders, to resign. Nor are there calls for the Israeli army to be held accountable.

Ed Davey’s statement blames the weaker side while calling for equality in statehood, knowing full well that the more powerful one is not even open to such possibility. Assuming good intentions, the whole Liberal Democrat statement is unrealistic and naive.

So, we find ourselves in a situation where the Tories are actively participating in genocide, Labour are following suit, and the Liberal Democrats are putting their heads in the sand.

What a tragic state of British politics.

"So, we find ourselves in a situation where the Tories are actively participating in genocide, Labour are following suit, and the Liberal Democrats are putting their heads in the sand"

We have been taught in GCSE history lessons how to spot propaganda, how the Soviets and Nazis employed theirs, and what the effect of it all was. We’ve been taught the values of accountability, that no one should be above the law. We have been taught that history reflects the present and predicts the future.

Now we see that same propaganda from Israeli media echoed by British politicians in British media. We see complete non-accountability of a murderous aggression carried out by Israel, and we see no lessons learned from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Is it then any surprise that my friends and colleagues in Western universities are increasingly labelling themselves “apolitical”? Many are already organising to strategise their votes in the next election. More and more candidates are labelling themselves “independent”, those seem to be rising in popularity.

If anything, these are all symptoms of a failing political system that prioritises winning elections over representing the average Briton.

Omar is an Egyptian-British PhD student at the University of Cambridge, and a pro-Palestinian activist. Whilst his research focuses on immunology and disease, Omar has further interests in politics, religion, and sociology.

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com

Opinions expressed here are the author's own, and do not necessarily reflect those of their employer, or of The New Arab and its editorial board or staff.