The anti-Muslim hatred tsar: a vital appointment or a trap for the Tories? – analysis by Charlie Peters

Does the Government know what it’s getting into?

It’s said to have NGO boss Fiyaz Mughal down as a front-runner for a new position as a new independent adviser on anti-Muslim hatred.

That’s the scoop from Christopher Hope, our political editor, who revealed this afternoon that an announcement could be made on Monday.

Sources close to Michael Gove said that Mughal was “one of a number of names we’re looking at”.

Gove, the communities minister, is understood to be reviewing the Government’s extremism legislation.

The new role is being formed as part of a major crackdown on extremism, which comes after Rishi Sunak addressed the nation on the issue outside Downing Street last week.

The Prime Minister lambasted both Islamists and the far-right in a lengthy address that said extremist groups were tearing the UK apart.

The incoming anti-Muslim hatred role comes amid a tense debate about that particular form of discrimination, with charities reporting a rise in anti-Muslim incidents alongside antisemitism since the October 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas and the ensuing war in Gaza and across the region.

The frontrunner, Mughal, is a consistent critic of the Government, a former Lib Dem councillor, and the founder of charities Faith Matters and Tell MAMA – a national project supporting victims of Islamophobia hatred, a term that the Government is clearly keen to avoid.

Dubbed by one Whitehall source as a “safe” choice, Chopper wrote that Mughal would be expected to work closely with Tory ministers and any Labour ministers if they come out on top at a General Election to be held later this year.

But Westminster watchers have expressed some concern to me. One said that it will “keep the conversation going” on an issue that is tricky for the Tories, with former chairman Lee Anderson causing controversy after he referred to Islamists in London as Sadiq Khan’s “mates.”

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Anne Diamond speaks of her Hawaii holiday horror: ‘So awful!’The Neil Oliver Show: WATCH the full two-hour special NOWMetropolitan Police slammed for ‘ceding control of the streets’ by Labour MP

Many derided this outburst as “Islamophobic”, and a critic said that this appointment of an anti-Muslim hatred tsar would bring references of the incident and other issues back into the spotlight.

“It’ll be frontpage of the BBC for the foreseeable”, the critic added.

The all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims promoted an Islamophobia definition in 2019, which was adopted by Labour and the Lib Dems but not by the Government or the Conservative Party.

Tory Party leadership hopeful Sajid Javid challenged his fellow candidates in the race that Boris won later that year, throwing the issue back into the limelight.

The Tories have never been comfortable approaching it and the ministers’ squirming responses after Anderson’s outburst only reaffirmed that struggle.

Many don’t use the term “Islamophobia,” which many Conservatives say falsely equates legitimate criticism of a religion and culture with racist bigotry.

Nick Timothy, a leading Tory commentator and candidate for the upcoming General Election, has said that the definition of “Islamophobia” from the APPG “makes clear its purpose is to protect Islam itself from criticism, not only Muslims from hatred based on their identity.”

He added: “It seems clear that in government Labour would put this into law.”

Getting Mr Mughal, and any other possible tsar, to agree to a Tory set of definitions and terms is surely set to be a significant part of the struggle for the Government.

It won’t be easy.

TellMAMA has come across my desk on multiple occasions.

Science journalist Tom Chivers criticised its use of statistics when it reported in 2019 a “surge” in anti-Muslim incidents.

Criticising its methodology, Chivers wrote: “The media should know better than to take the dramatic numbers it comes up with at face value, assume a causal link where none can be shown, and then plaster the whole thing under a dramatic headline. Britain already feels like a powder keg, and these are just more sparks flying around.”

Elsewhere, TellMAMA runs the National “No2H8 Crime Awards”. As chair of the awards, Mr Mughal has argued that issues “such as the cost of living crisis and the fallout from the toxic polarisation of the Brexit debate still continue to polarise parts of our society.”

And he has directly criticised the Tories before.

In March 2019, he attacked the Tories for Islamophobia in a piece for the Guardian: “This week Baroness Warsi accused the Conservative party of being ‘institutionally racist’. It is a serious charge and she is not alone in her criticisms. Speak to key Conservative activists who are Muslim and there is a sense of disappointment. The only path forward is to ask for help.”

This hardly sounds like the language of a natural Tory appointment.

And on the major foreign policy crisis that has sparked such an intense domestic concern about extremism and inter-community tensions, the Tories and Mr Mughal are singing from different hymn sheets.

In a piece for the Jewish News published in January, Mr Mughal wrote that “Israel’s campaign in Gaza has flattened it and the brutality of the killing has been shocking. Also shocking has been the brutality and blood-thirstiness of Hamas in their invasion of Israel. These facts cannot be hidden or disputed. Both Hamas and the Israeli government’s actions have been brutal and inhumane.”

Using similar language to describe the actions of Hamas with the IDF strays beyond the government’s line, which has always carefully avoided any equivocation between a key Middle Eastern ally and the terrorist group.

But Alan Mendoza, head of the neoconservative think tank the Henry Jackson Society, told me that there should be “no concerns” about his likely appointment.

“This is an independent appointment and we would expect the appointee to give their considered view without fear nor favour.

“Equally, any appointee will know that in order to make progress, they will need to bring the government along with them rather than square off against them.”

He added: “As long as these parameters are clearly understood on both sides there should be no concerns about this particular appointment.”

Anti-Muslim tsar: vital public appointment or a mine of their own making? We’ll find out soon enough.