This is a cross post from Adam Langleben’s thoughts on Barnet, Europe and the Jewish World by Adam Langleben. 

Much has been written over the past several weeks about the co-op’s decision to boycott products produced from the West Bank and Unison’s decision to un-invite Moty Cristal from speaking at a conference in Manchester. I will not dwell too much on it or repeat it, as you can find information and comment elsewhere.

Why has this happened? And why do these (mostly irrational and ill-thought through) boycott motions continually happen, over and over again?

Answer: Because we (the Jewish community) broadly speaking do not engage with those bodies. Of course, Trades Union Friends of Israel, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council, as well as others engage on a senior level, but this often lacks the necessary punch in organisations such as trades unions or co-operatives. These organisations are democratic bodies, and communication at the top will only get you so far.

What we need are teaching staff, civil servants, local government workers and others to actually join their trades unions and engage in these bodies.

Ruthlessly attacking bodies such as these after a vote has been cast simply forces them to take a defensive line, as they need to defend the decision made via the mandate that they have, regardless of turnout, as these are the rules.

I joined the Labour Party when I was 20, back then I did not realise that by being a Jewish member of this party, a party with a great tradition that I am proud of, I would be on the frontline in the fight against Delegitimisation of the State of Israel. However, this responsibility has been thrust upon myself and all other Jewish and Zionist members of the Labour Party, it is not a task we asked for, and often we may fail at influencing our peers, but we have a voice at the table because we have a great many Jewish members and make ourselves heard.

As a member of the GMB I have written to my branch secretary asking for clarification on their interpretation of the TUC stance on Israel. I am also awaiting a reply from my local Cooperative representative about the boycott on West Bank produce.

Public sector workers, especially Jewish ones are also on the front line. They have an opportunity to influence their representative trades unions to ensure that they are not hijacked and turned into vehicles which promote values opposite to that of the mainstream.

I would like to see a Trades Unions/Cooperative/local political parties (of any mainstream persuasion) membership drive within the community to ensure that we are part of the discussion, inside the tent rather than peeking through a hole on the outside shouting, kicking and screaming.

So find one and join! Never know, you might actually enjoy it!

We are appalled that Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust has cancelled a planned talk by a mediation expert solely because he is Israeli. This decision appears to be unlawful discrimination on the basis of nationality, taken by an NHS Trust. There must be an independent investigation into how this happened, possibly followed by dismissals or prosecutions of those who have broken the law. 
 
UNISON, which pressured for this boycott, is acting like a racist organisation. UNISON also claimed that banning Israeli speakers is consistant with the policy of the Trade Union Congress. We call on the TUC to clearly state that this is not TUC policy and to condemn the UNISON branch’s discriminatory actions.

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign wants to have it both ways.

On the one hand, many of its members and activists don’t believe that Israel should exist. PSC does not support a two-state solution.

On the other hand, PSC as been working hard in order to attract Trade Unions and MPs as affiliates. To do this, PSC has had to wear moderate clothes. Most of the Trade Unions that are affiliated to PSC have a pro-two-state policy, and so do some of the MPs who are involved in it. If you asked some of these MPs or Union General Secretaries whether the Palestine Solidarity Campaign supported Israel’s continuing right to exist, they’d say “of course it does”. I know this because I’ve done it.

PSC works hard to stop its most high-profile supporters learning what they’ve signed up to, but they can’t hide the most obvious clue: the PSC logo, which includes a map of the whole of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.

PSC's logo

This week’s Jewish Chronicle reveals that Green Party MP Caroline Lucas has written to the PSC to raise the issue of their logo. She writes:

“It has been brought to my attention that the PSC logo appears to reflect 1917, pre-creation of Israel, borders and as such could be open to interpretation by some as implying non-recognition of Israel’s right to exist. I am following this up with the director of the PSC since I am quite sure that PSC does indeed recognise Israel’s right to exist, and it is unhelpful and damaging if any other impression is given.”

Caroline Lucas is not a friend of Israel, and the Green Party’s policy on Israel (such as their support for boycotts) is harmful and wrong. However, she has done exactly the right thing here and shown leadership. Other MPs and Trade Unions who work with PSC should do the same and not allow the PSC’s leaders to equivocate.

Ultimately, if the PSC does not change its logo that wipes Israel off the map, then Caroline Lucas – and all of us – will have our answer.

Today, UCU voted to reject the EUMC working definition of antisemitism, leaving nothing in its place.

• CST explain why the EUMC definition is important here
• Ben Gidley has an excellent piece on why this motion is so problematic here

The motion comes after five years of UCU passing boycotts of Israel, inviting racists to speak, ignoring the resignations of Jewish members and allowing a deeply uncomfortable atmosphere for Jewish members to persist in the union.

Before the motion, Jewish leaders wrote to UCU General Secretary Sally Hunt. They also contacted Trevor Phillips of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who confirmed that nobody from UCU consulted with the Commission. He restated the importance of the MacPhearson definition of a racist incident, saying:

“..if the object of harrasment or attack regards her treatment as being anti-semitic, even if the perpetrator maintains that their action is politically motivated, the presumption is that the victim’s perception is what defines the incident.”

None of this made any difference. The motion was proposed by the Union’s own National Executive Committee and passed by a huge majority. See Engage’s live blog of the debate.

We now believe that UCU is an institutionally racist organisation. If you agree, join our Twitter campaign and help spread the word. We tweeted:

We believe that @UCU is an institutionally racist organisation. RT if you agree.

If you’re a Twitter user and you agree with us, then join in, tweet and spread the word.

“UCU’s treatment of its Jewish members over the last five years includes assaulting their identity, ignoring their harassment in the Union and refusing to investigate their resignations. Now UCU has gone further and simply redefined ‘antisemitism’ itself. UCU will actually campaign for other organisations to stop fully fighting antisemitism, and has changed its procedures so complaints from Jewish members will be treated with suspicion.

The truth is apparent: whatever the motivations of its members, we believe UCU is an institutionally racist organisation.”

For a live report of UCU’s vote on redefining antisemitism, see ENGAGE.