Saturday, May 21, 2005

One of the most interesting aspects of George Galloway's recent testimony to the US Senate subcommittee has been the reaction of the US left and even sections of the the American media. As the Guardian pointed out earlier this week, even Fox News was forced to conclude that Galloway had made a robust defence of his position and the senators had made a poor fist of giving Gorgeous George a grilling. Fox presenter John Gibson didn't know whether Galloway was guilty but what he did know was, "that if you're going to bring Galloway in for the grilling, be sure to bring the grill, be sure to have plenty of propane in the tank and do the darn grilling. Galloway got away scot-free here. (Senator Norm) Coleman meekly sat there and got chewed out."

Maybe that's because the US position is built on lies and hypocrisy.

The reasons why Galloway has met with such a positive reception from large sections of the US left and has drawn such media interest is that he both departs from the formalised niceties the US public has come to expect from its politicans (especially in the Senate) and that Galloway is a progressive who has actually dared to go on to the offensive.

These are all points addressed more seriously by former weapons inspector Scott Ritter in a column in today's Guardian.

One of the important points touched upon in Galloway's testimony was his long-standing opposition to the Iraqi regime. What the British commentariat could never get their heads around - mainly because they chose not to - was that one could oppose the regime and oppose the war.

For the British commentariat - following the example of the late Christopher Hitchens - Galloway and his supporters are Islamofascists. In this looking glass world columnists like former Eurocommunist David Aaronovitch and his Observer colleague, Nick Cohen strive to redefine the right and centre as the new left and the left as the new right. As the Eurocommunists in the former Communist Party of Great Britain regularly used to demonstrate, despite the split with Stalinism certain practices and rhetorical devices remained ingrained. One was the third period tendency to define those who oppose a given strategy as functional allies of one's enemies (social democrats were social fascists, Trotskyists were simply fascists).

Events such as the Senate hearing and the actions of Galloway and Respect are shining a light on such obfuscation.

Galloway is not without his faults and he has undoubtedly shown poor judgement at times. His uncritical support for Cuba is one such example and some of his comments and historical analogies regarding the resistance are ill-conceived. It must also be stressed that Respect must be more than a vehicle for Galloway's political resurrection. However, the strong performance in other parts of London and the Midlands show that is what it already is. The UK needs a progressive force to the left of Labour, capable of addressing the needs of all sections of the community and uniting a range of progressive voices. Respect has the potential to be that force.