Photo: Home Secretary James Cleverly (Credit: Ravi Soodi/Home Office)
No definition for Islamophobia, no ceasefire in Gaza, and no arms embargo against Israel.
In an exclusive interview with Home Secretary James Cleverly on July 2, Ahmed J. Versi, Editor of The Muslim News, raised concerns about Islamophobia within the Conservative Party, a longstanding issue that continues to trouble the party. The Muslim News also probed into criticism of the government’s reaction to senior cabinet and party members’ use of Islamophobic language and questioned why the government has been hesitant to adopt the comprehensive APPG definition of Islamophobia. This contrasts sharply with the government’s quick acceptance of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism, despite similar criticisms.
Versi also questioned Cleverly, who served as Foreign Secretary at the onset of the Gaza conflict, about the UK government’s response. He challenged why the government did not actively call for a ceasefire or impose an arms embargo on Israel during the conflict, especially given widespread public support for such actions, as shown in surveys of British voters. Additionally, Ahmed queried the government’s position on Israel’s distinction between defensive and offensive military actions and its dismissal of the International Court of Justice’s findings regarding Israel’s conduct in the conflict.
Ahmed J. Versi
Do you accept that there is an Islamophobia problem in the Conservative Party?
James Cleverly
Well, I’m very proud of the fact that the first Muslim to hold high office in this country was under the Conservatives. We have a very good track record of supporting the wide diversity in this country and making sure that people who work hard and have aspirations are rewarded and supported. And where there have been problems, we have investigated them promptly. We have complied completely and happily with the recommendations of the independent review. And so, I would never say any political party is completely free of people who say and do inappropriate things. But we have taken action. We’ve taken action quickly. and I’m very, very proud that we have a good track record of supporting Muslim talent within the party.
Ahmed J. Versi
But you’ve had a lot of politicians in government push Islamophobic tropes. You’ve had Lee Anderson claim that the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is controlled by Islamists. You’ve had Suella Braverman write in the Telegraph claiming that Parliament is taken over by Islamists. You’ve had Robert Jenrick, who said we have allowed our streets to be dominated by Islamist extremists, and when he made that remark in Parliament, there was no response from the government. So you can see you have this kind of huge Islamophobia problem.
James Cleverly
Well, in the case of Lee Anderson, he was suspended from the party, and he ultimately left the party. So, we took very immediate action. One of the things that we’ve got to recognise is that the comments that were made by Suella and Robert were in direct response to a small number of people involved in marches who were saying and doing deeply inappropriate things. That was not a condemnation of Islam as a faith or a criticism of the huge contribution made by Muslims in British society. It was specifically about inappropriate behaviour we saw in some of those marches. Now, that’s not language that I personally would have used, but it’s important that we recognise that sometimes a small number of people say and do things that warrant criticism, but that is not the same as implying that a whole religion or a whole community in the UK is responsible for that, and that’s not what they were doing.
Ahmed J. Versi
Are you saying that the Parliament has been taken over by Islamists and that the streets of the UK have been taken over by Islamists?
James Cleverly
No. That’s never language that I have used. And the point is that in politics, people say things, and they individually need to justify the statements that they have made. I have never said that. I would never say that. I very much value the Muslim contribution to society. As you are probably aware, I’ve been a member of the reserve forces for many decades, and the enormous contribution that Muslim soldiers have made over centuries is incredibly important. That’s why I was very, very proud that [the Chancellor] Jeremy Hunt announced funding for a specific memorial to recognise the contribution Muslim soldiers have made to the British armed forces, both in contemporary society and historically. That’s always been my position, and I’m very proud of the position I have taken and the position the government in general has taken.
Ahmed J. Versi
If, as you said, the government and the Conservative Party are against Islamophobia, why has the government continuously refused to accept the definition of Islamophobia by APPG (All-Party Parliamentary Group) British Muslims, which has been accepted by all political parties, including the Scottish Conservative Party?
James Cleverly
The reason for that is that we have been very specific. We condemn anti-Muslim hatred. We condemn any form of discrimination; we condemn any form of vilification. However, the APPG definition, in our estimation, is far too broad to be a useful vehicle. It is well-intentioned, but ultimately the definition is too broad and could have the effect of making it very, very difficult to have a proper debate about the role of extremism in society from whatever direction that comes from. So, we have looked at this carefully. Our view is that the definition is too loose, and it is too broad. And that is why we have said that anti-Muslim hatred is wrong, discrimination is wrong, and vilification is wrong, and we will always take action on that. But that specific definition, in our view, is too broad.
Ahmed J. Versi
But you had the [Islamophobia consultant] Imam Qasim appointed just when Boris Johnson became the Prime Minister. But he was just there; the government did not use him and did not do anything until he was made to resign. And since then, we haven’t had anyone look into this definition and say, Okay, this is what we would like to have. Instead, you have been refusing to accept the definition, and you have not replaced him with anyone else.
James Cleverly
Well, as I said, we have looked at that definition. The definition from the APPG hasn’t changed. Our view is that it is too broad, and that remains our position. But we have been very, very active in making sure that we support the Muslim community. We have given funding to protect Islamic places of worship and Islamic cultural centres. We have made it very, very clear that discrimination, vilification, and prejudice are unacceptable and that we will take action. Our view is that the definition is too broad, and the definition has remained unchanged; therefore, so has our position.
Ahmed J. Versi
But you have accepted the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-Semitism, which many experts argued is too broad, too, but you have accepted it despite all the challenges.
James Cleverly
It’s not about just saying, Well, you did one thing there, so you have to do something here. We take all of these things on their individual merits. The APPG definition, in our view, is too broad, and that is the reason why we haven’t adopted it. But we have taken very specific and firm action to make sure that Muslims in the UK are protected from discrimination and vilification. And as I say, as a party, I’m very proud of the fact that we have a number of government ministers of the Muslim faith. We were the first to have a government minister who was Muslim, Baroness Warsi, a chancellor [Sajid Javid], who was Muslim. And I’m very, very proud of the fact that we still have a huge amount of support within the party from Muslim communities in the UK.
Ahmed J. Versi
Over 70% of the people in the UK have called for a ceasefire and arms embargo against Israel because of the atrocities that have been committed by Israel and continue to be committed. Almost 38,000 people have been killed, over 70% of them women and children. So why has the government refused to call for a permanent ceasefire and implement an arms embargo against Israel?
James Cleverly
Well, calling for a ceasefire is not the same as achieving a ceasefire. And we have seen that. When I was in the Foreign Office, I worked extensively with countries in the region, not just Israel but, of course, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and the countries of the Gulf and North Africa, to try and bring about a meaningful, sustainable peace settlement. We have long called for a sustainable and peaceful two-state solution that requires cooperation from Israelis and Palestinians, both in Gaza and the West Bank. I met extensively with the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. I’ve not met directly with the leadership in Gaza, but I have met with the Qataris who have acted as intermediaries. We’ve pushed very, very hard to get more aid into Gaza. And we have said that sustainable peace needs to ensure the peace and protection of not just Israelis but also Palestinians. It does mean that Hamas has got to drop their desire to destroy the state of Israel. It also means that the people who have been taken hostage or kidnapped, including children, the elderly, and the frail, are released. When it comes to the arms relationship with Israel, we see that Israel is still under regular rocket attacks coming from Gaza. And much of the military equipment is defensive in nature. We always and regularly review the criteria for arms exports, and we always call for Israel to abide by international humanitarian law. So, our position on this has been consistent. We continue to look to get aid to the Palestinian people in Gaza and bring a sustainable solution to this very longstanding and difficult conflict.
Ahmed J. Versi
But on the question of the weapons embargo on Israel, Israel has dropped more bombs on Gaza than were used in the Second World War blitz on major cities. So their arms use is not defensive; it’s all offensive.
James Cleverly
That’s not the case at all. The point that we’ve, made is that the terrorist atrocity that was perpetrated on the 7th of October has brought a huge amount of pain and suffering, both to Israelis and to Gazans. And that is directly due to the decisions taken by Hamas. Hamas are not good servants of the Palestinian people. I’ve met and spoken regularly with the Palestinian political leadership of the West Bank. It is simply the case that the terrorism perpetrated by Hamas was the trigger event for this conflict. Hamas could bring this to a very quick end through the release of hostages and a commitment to cease their aggression against Israel. They have chosen not to do that. Now, we have always made it clear to Israel that, in their self-defence, they must abide by international humanitarian law. And we have made it clear that there will, of course, need to be an independent assessment of the conduct of all parties in this conflict. Throughout this, we have been seeking to get more aid into Gaza to alleviate the suffering.
Ahmed J. Versi
But an independent assessment of Israel’s conduct has been done by the ICJ, which our government has rejected.
James Cleverly
That’s not accurate. The ICJ says that there is a credible risk that is not the same as a final assessment. We will, of course, wait for any final assessment before we make a decision.
Ahmed J. Versi
So why did the government…
James Cleverly
I do apologise, but we really do. I’ve got to finish up, so I’ve got another interview that I need to go to.
Ahmed J. Versi
Okay.
James Cleverly
Thank you so much, Ahmed. Thank you so much.
