It was a short email, like many of the death threats this British Jewish doctor has received. Subject: ‘Legitimate target.’ Body: ‘May I find you walking the streets of London. I’ll put a bullet through that Zionist face of yours.’
These sorts of threats are regularly passed to the Community Security Trust (CST), a charity which provides security to Jews in the UK. But as many of the senders are anonymous, not much can be done.
The BMA, which already has an impressive track record of anti-Semitic, Israel-obsessed motions and actions, has managed to hit a new low with this vote
This doctor’s main crime was to call out anti-Semitism and double standards towards Israel, while consistently condemning other forms of racism and supporting a future Palestinian state. But there is little room for nuance nowadays when you have ‘a Zionist face’.
‘Everything went crazy after October 7. Since then, every year has been terrible for us,’ says a senior member of the Jewish Medical Association (JMA). The JMA was founded in 2007 to support Jewish healthcare professionals and students. These days it increasingly focuses on combating surging anti-Semitism in the healthcare system.
The JMA source asked to remain anonymous so as not to become a more obvious target. The campaign against the JMA has intensified recently. A newly incorporated UK-based advocacy group, Healthcare Workers Against Censorship (HAC), says it promotes ‘freedom of speech for all individuals working within the healthcare sector’. Its activities, however, seem to suggest that this ‘freedom’ should be guaranteed for anyone but Jews. In a fundraising video, HAC’s three listed directors – Dr Rehiana Ali, Dr Tamara Ali and Dr Ranjeet Brar – preach about doctors being allowed to engage in ‘lawful political speech’, only to end the video with a photo of two of them holding a sign reading: ‘Say no to “genocide” doctors — Ban the Jewish Medical Association’. In the video, they claim that ‘doctors are being targeted by well-financed pro-Israel lobby groups – ardent Zionists’, warning that ‘the result is a chilling effect across the entire profession’.
In November 2023, Dr Brar distributed pamphlets depicting the Star of David enmeshed with the swastika, titled: ‘Zionism: a racist, anti-Semitic, and reactionary tool of imperialism’. He was arrested by police, though no prosecution followed. Last April, he gave a speech outside the US embassy in which he called for the complete destruction of Israel, expressed support for Iran and for Lebanese and Yemeni ‘resistance’, said that the US and Israeli embassies are ‘parasites’, and referred to the ‘Epstein class’ as the ‘enemies of humanity’.
‘They’re trying to destroy us as an organisation, but I don’t think they will manage. They’ve said recently that the JMA should be banned because we’re “an extremist group”,’ the JMA source says, laughing bitterly. ‘Many of HAC’s doctors are very loudly anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist. The concern is that they don’t just threaten using words, but that other people will pick that up. It’s a bit like “globalise the intifada” – people hear that and do something, thinking it’s okay to be violent.’
HAC is probably the most radical expression of the intimidation Jewish healthcare workers face in the NHS. Earlier this month, the UK government’s adviser on anti-Semitism, Lord Mann, published an urgent government-commissioned report on anti-Semitism in the health service, noting that he had heard ‘evidence of routine ostracism of Jewish people, continuous negativity to people because of their identity, extreme behaviours including serious race hate incidents.’
For David, a Jewish senior consultant with more than 20 years’ experience in the NHS, who also asked to remain anonymous out of fear of repercussions, these findings came as no surprise. A WhatsApp group of hundreds of British Jewish doctors has been filled since October 7 with stories of anti-Semitic incidents. Despite avoiding bringing politics into work – ‘I don’t think it’s relevant’ – David has experienced what he calls ‘a lower level of anti-Semitism that no one will bother reporting’, adding that ‘some people would be appalled to find out that they are anti-Semitic.’
Perhaps a precise definition of anti-Semitism would be useful – yet even on that basic matter, the medical world is split. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism was adopted by the UK government in 2016 and by NHS England last year, amid a surge in anti-Semitism in the health service. Lord Mann explains in his report that it is ‘the most prominent international standard of anti-Jewish racism… a helpful guide and gives confidence to Jewish communities’, adding that it preserves freedom of speech, as criticism of the actions of Israel, or support for a Palestinian state or for the plight of Palestinians, ‘does not in and of itself constitute anti-Semitism or contradict IHRA’.
But for the anti-Zionist crowd in scrubs, who do not believe Jews should have their own homeland, this is not enough. ‘We’re the only minority group whose own description of the hate perpetrated against us is not accepted,’ says the JMA source.
On Tuesday, the British Medical Association (BMA) voted for the IHRA definition to be scrapped. The motion asserted that the definition has a ‘chilling effect’ on political expression and on doctors who have ‘ethical concerns about Israel’s actions in Palestine’. The BMA, which already has an impressive track record of anti-Semitic, Israel-obsessed motions and actions, has managed to hit a new low with this vote.
Watching the vote was like watching a crash in slow motion. Dr Shabina Sultan, who delivered the motion, received loud applause, unlike the Jews who gave counter speeches, many of them exposing anti-Semitic incidents they and their fellow Jewish healthcare professionals have experienced. Sultan claimed that, ‘The IHRA definition is used to silence Muslims and Palestinian voices, by equating anti Zionism with anti-Semitism. This definition weaponises accusations to suppress our voices and to obscure our oppression.’
David, one of the few Jews who is still a BMA member, said to me after the vote that he is considering leaving the organisation for good. ‘They have a blind spot for Jews, even as we experience more racism per head than any other group. If they want to lobby the government to remove this protection, to facilitate attacks against me and allow people to target me, I won’t feel they can represent me any more.’ He also noted that the motion was listed as an international relations issue: ‘They are othering Jews, treating anti-Semitism as a foreign issue rather than a persistent problem here.’ David added that, ‘the BMA had a choice and has actively chosen to stand in solidarity with anti-Semites, not Jews.’
The implementation of the IHRA definition has not been watertight, as the NHS did not require its organisations to adopt it. But in some cases it has had an impact. Dr Brar, who was suspended by King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust after his April remarks, recently filed a judicial review claim against the Trust, challenging its alleged use of the IHRA definition.
Meanwhile, many Jewish doctors are leaving the country. Speaking by phone from Israel days after his migration, Dr Baruch Michaels, a junior doctor, says his whole family has left Britain, despite having lived here for 400 years, since the days of Oliver Cromwell. He did not grow up in fear of being visibly Jewish, but ‘in the last ten years I really noticed the change’, he says. ‘My main experience of anti-Semitism is going to and from work: being shouted at in the streets, threatened with acid.’
The NHS was not a safe haven for him and he ended up quitting the BMA. He once heard a colleague say they would not treat an Israeli patient at A&E. ‘I think Britain is a ship we can turn around, but only if the government and the general public start to understand what is going on.’
After the vote, the BMA told the Jewish Chronicle that, ‘Doctors must be able to legitimately challenge the actions of states and armed forces, especially when healthcare is under threat, without being unfairly accused of any kind of discrimination, or threatened with disciplinary action. This motion speaks to the frustration of members who feel that their freedom to do this is under threat, and we will continue to advocate for all doctors and medical students to appropriately exercise freedom of expression on matters of conscience while at the same time protecting them from discrimination.’
‘Antisemitism is completely unacceptable’ and there is no place for it within the BMA, NHS or wider society, it stated. However, before the vote, when I approached the BMA for comment about what it has done to tackle anti-Semitism within its own ranks, I was answered with silence.
With that attitude, perhaps the ship cannot be turned after all.
Comments