While the Labor party could once count on the support of the vast majority of British Jews, and British Jews could count on Labor to be favorably inclined toward the state of Israel, those days are long gone. This has been especially true since the far left took over the party under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn. Dave Rich explains:

[The] anti-American, anti-imperialist strain of the British left [that now dominates] has deep roots, but the 2003 Iraq war gave it a new impetus, and opened up a broad rift in the Labor party. On one side are supporters of the [Tony] Blair legacy that includes a warm embrace of Israel and of Labor Zionists; on the other stand Corbyn and other veterans of the Stop the War Coalition. Despite the initial mass protests against the Iraq war, the coalition was run by an activist core of far-left groups like the Socialist Workers party allied with Islamists like the Muslim Association of Britain. For this alliance, a visceral objection to Israel’s existence was a key point of unity.

The Muslim Association of Britain has been described by a government minister as the British “representative” of the international Muslim Brotherhood organization. The Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood is Hamas, the radical group that governs Gaza—and which Corbyn has praised for its commitment to “peace and social justice and political justice.” This is not the only case of Corbyn’s appearing to align himself with Islamism: from 2009 to 2012, he was a paid host on the Iranian state-owned Press TV.

For many British Jews and others, Corbyn thus personifies a tolerance among parts of the left for reactionary Islamists that is at best naïve, at worst malign—not least because it overlooks Islamism’s history of murderous repression toward democratic socialists in Muslim-majority countries.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.