'One-sided' Middle East policy attacked by Labour Arab group
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Tony Blair's "shoulder-to-shoulder" support for the Bush administration has been attacked by a Labour-affiliated body on the eve of the party's annual conference in Manchester.
The 300-strong Arab Labour Group has accused the Prime Minister of adopting a one-sided approach to the Middle East crisis because of Washington's strong support for Israel. It has launched a campaign to persuade Mr Blair's successor to adopt a more balanced policy.
In a letter published in The Independent today, the group says it feels "let down" by the Government in the wake of the conflict in Lebanon."Unfortunately, Mr Blair has failed to treat both sides equally. Instead he has bowed to pressure put on him by Israel backed by George Bush," it says. The group, most of whom are Labour members, includes Jews, Christians and Muslims.
Atallah Said, its chairman, said: "We have been overlooked and neglected, treated as second-class citizens. It seems to me there is a very big Zionist lobby in the party. In Lebanon, our government took the same stand as America. If we had had an immediate ceasefire, fewer people would have been killed."
Mr Said claimed Mr Blair had made "promise after promise" to solve the Israel-Palestine question but failed to put enough pressure on the Bush administration. "We are not saying he should be biased in favour of either the Palestinians or Israelis. We just want a fair foreign policy," he said.
In his speech to the Labour conference on Tuesday, the Prime Minister is expected to reaffirm his commitment to the Middle East peace process. He is unlikely to admit he made mistakes over the Lebanon conflict despite being criticised by many Labour MPs for giving the impression that he opposed an immediate ceasefire.
The Arab Labour Group hopes the contest to choose Mr Blair's successor next year will allow a debate over foreign policy.
Mr Blair's Middle East policy came under further attack from Lord Morris, the former leader of the Transport Workers' union, who described it as "an appendage" of Washington. He told GMTV's Sunday programme: "We have the situation where the Prime Minister visited the Middle East a few weeks ago and he might as well have stayed at home for the effect he had because we're not trusted."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments