An apologist’s apologist

Readers of this paper will be well aware of George Galloway’s recent appalling statements. On the one hand, he has acted as an apologist of the first order for the theocratic regime in Iran; on the other, he has sided with rightwing religious bigots in opposing embryo research.

As previously reported, home secretary Jacqui Smith caved in to pressure and decided to review the case of Mehdi Kazemi, who was facing deportation to Iran, where he could be executed as a gay. Kazemi’s former partner, Parham, was hanged in 2006, but Galloway claimed that this was not for his homosexuality, but for “sex crimes”. Under Iran’s islamic law any active homosexual relationship in itself represents a ‘sex crime’ (lavat).

Instead of condemning both the Iran regime for its murderous homophobia and the UK government for its imperialist-driven complicity, Galloway looked at the whole business in a completely one-sided way: “This is a useful story for the war propaganda machine,” he said. That is true, but the Respect MP then went on to demonstrate how not to combat that machine.

Those who dare criticise Tehran were playing into the hands of the warmongers, he alleged - in fact by “attacking Iran in the way that he does”, Peter Tatchell of the gay rights campaign, Outrage, had become “the pink end of the khaki war machine”. The fact that Tatchell is also a leading member of Hands Off the People of Iran, whose first demand is “No to imperialist war!”, is apparently irrelevant.

Just a week or so later, Galloway (after a side swipe against gambling, over which he specifically lined himself up with “pastor Ian Paisley”) launched a tirade against embryo research in his Daily Record column. He claimed that the proposal in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to permit the injection of human DNA into animal eggs “blasphemes against the very idea of god” (March 24).

Galloway’s party, Respect Renewal, has made no official comment on either issue. But what about the left within RR - in particular the comrades in and around the International Socialist Group? Surely, at the very least, they would point out that Galloway was not speaking on behalf of Respect and make clear their own opposition to his pro-Iran apologia and his anti-rationalist views on embryo research?

Afraid not. The ISG comrades also seem to have been struck dumb. However, one man who has been unable to stay quiet is Liam Mac Uaid - simply because he runs the well read blog, liammacuaid.wordpress.com, which has seen a good deal of comment on Galloway’s utterances.

Mac Uaid, as a former member of the editorial board of Socialist Resistance (the ISG-sponsored paper whose resources were handed over to Respect Renewal and is now the Respect paper), is still very close to the ISG. His blog can be relied upon to feature every ISG statement (usually before the ISG itself) and carry all the good news coming out of Respect Renewal.

When Galloway made his anti-Tatchell outburst, a lot of heat was generated on the Mac Uaid blog from comrades seeking answers from Liam, who had not thought the matter worthy of a mention. When he did comment at last, comrade Mac Uaid felt compelled not only to explain away Galloway’s remarks but to himself join the apologia bandwagon. “Iran, like many other parts of the world, might not be an easy place to be out and gay,” he remarked. Well, that is true. Comrade Mac Uaid continued: “but there is nothing in its penal code to say it’s a hanging offence.” That’s all right then. Gays may be routinely executed, but as long as Iran’s penal code does not specify that they should be …

When confronted over the Galloway outburst, and his failure to sign an early day motion sponsored by Diane Abbott on the plight of Mehdi Kazemi, Mac Uaid said he was unable to comment, as he had not read the motion. Which is strange, considering its brevity and the fact that his site carries a link to another blog, from where Abbott’s motion is just a click away. And comrade Mac Uaid had himself posted two items on this second site, Stroppyblog, since the Abbott motion had featured there. Either he pigheadedly chose to ignore it or else he cannot think of a good reason why Galloway should not have signed the motion.

When one of our supporters challenged comrade Mac Uaid over Galloway’s views on Mehdi Kazemi following a Respect Renewal meeting, he replied: “You saw the comrades in there - these are not the priorities of the members.” The nearest he got to a criticism of Galloway was: “Obviously it’s disappointing, coming from the left.”

Clearly Mac Uaid is a blatant apologist for Galloway. His line reminds me of the ISG’s excuse as to why Respect was not raising awkward questions like abortion or the religious hatred legislation on the campaign trail. Apparently they are not issues “on the doorstep”.

If any of these questions - a woman’s right to choose an abortion, the right to speak out openly on religious matters, the need for embryo research, the persecution of gays, the deportation of migrants - are “not the priorities” either of Respect members or of workers in general, then it is the responsibility of ‘revolutionary socialists’ to ensure that they become priorities.