As the United Kingdom prepares for its next election, the Labor leader (and likely next prime minister) Keir Starmer released a campaign video in which he talks at length about the problem of Islamophobia, and alludes to using the legal system to combat it. Meanwhile, in the U.S., politicians and public institutions have gotten themselves in the habit of responding to every outburst of hostility to Jews with condemnations of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Ed Husain argues that these two things are not alike:

Islamophobia is a fear of ideas, beliefs, and attitudes. Violence or discrimination against adherents of any religion is obviously indefensible, but it should also go without saying that in a free society people should be at liberty to criticize or mock any organized religion. No intelligent Muslim should place the word “Islam” and the word “phobia” together in a single phrase. This is why the word did not exist until relatively recently. [The term] Islamophobia has been largely promoted by Islamists and jihadists, to protect them from scrutiny.

Legislating against “Islamophobia” would have disastrous consequences. The German judge who refused to grant a Muslim woman a divorce from her abusive husband in 2007 did so on the grounds that the abuse was culturally acceptable and sanctioned by the Quran. Such incidents would become normal for fear of accusations of “Islamophobia.” Let’s remember that the i-word has been used not only against politicians but also against Muslims who confront jihadists.

Recent reports suggest that the White House has at last acted to allow the shipments of weapons that had been withheld from Israel and to end further the delays. On this topic, Elliott Abrams comments, “I don’t know what and how much has been held up, but it shouldn’t have happened. The level of delay should be zero.”

In this interview with Ariel Kahana, Abrams also comments on the failings of U.S. policy toward Iran, and the Biden administration’s refusal to enforce existing sanctions:

According to Abrams, Iran has indeed halted the advancement of its nuclear program on rare occasions. “This happened when Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, and when [President] Trump eliminated Qassem Suleimani in 2020. The U.S. needs to be ready to use force in Iran, but credibility is critical here. Only if [Iran’s leaders] are convinced that the U.S. is willing to act will they stop.”

Abrams claims that the U.S. president tried for two-and-a-half years to revive the nuclear deal with Iran until he realized it wasn’t interested. “Iran has benefited from this situation, and everyone outside the administration sees it as a failure.”