Is Keir Starmer in trouble?

Unless something extraordinary happens, Sir Keir Starmer will be the next prime minister. All the polls show Labour on course to win a large majority in next year’s general election. Yet it’s being widely reported that Starmer faces the gravest test of his leadership, all over a conflict more than 2,000 miles away. 

Imran Hussain has become the first member of Starmer’s shadow cabinet to quit over the war in Gaza. In an open-letter published on X last night, the Bradford MP said he wanted to ‘strongly advocate for a ceasefire’ and his views differed ‘substantially’ from Starmer’s. Others could follow the former shadow minister for the New Deal for Working (no, me neither) in stepping down.

Would a Middle Eastern conflict really stop Muslims from voting for a party that looks after their immediate economic interests?

Elsewhere, ten Labour councillors resigned from Burnley this week; several other councillors quit in other constituencies last month. What they all want is a ceasefire.

Starmer is right to ignore them. In a surprisingly statesman-like speech last week, he said a ceasefire would freeze the conflict at a moment of relative strength for Hamas. That’s no basis for a politically negotiated outcome. A ceasefire isn’t possible while Hamas holds 240 hostages, and refuses to allow the Red Cross to visit them.

Of course every sane, moral person wants to see an end to bloody conflict. But a ceasefire requires both sides to agree. Ever since 7 October there have been no indications that Hamas is a willing partner for peace.

Take the comments of the terror group’s deputy foreign minister, Ghazi Hamad, who said the massacre of 7 October will happen ‘again and again’ until Israel is ‘annihilated’, and that the terrible loss of life in Gaza was a ‘necessary price’. Other senior Hamas leaders have all made similar statements on their merry broadcast rounds. Hamas rockets continue to be fired at Israel from Gaza.

The reality is that Labour’s lead in the polls is so vast and has been for so long that anything that might dent that, however insignificant, is excitedly reported as a ‘crisis’. Channel 4 helped create some drama when they mistakenly reported that Muslims make up the majority in 30 constituencies. In reality, that’s the case in just three.

The latest round of the Israel-Palestine conflict will likely be over in a few months. The date for the next election will probably be in October next year. In 11 months will this conflict be a deciding factor in how people vote? That seems highly unlikely. 

Labour has traditionally been the party for Muslims: around 85 per cent vote for them. That’s hardly surprising looking at Office for National Statistics data. The 2021 census shows that less than half (45.6 per cent) own their own homes (compared to 62.8 per cent of the population); they have the highest percentage (26.6 per cent) of people living in ‘social rented’ housing (compared to 16.6 per cent of the population). They also have higher levels of unemployment (51.4 per cent in employment compared to 70.9 per cent of the overall population). Would a conflict in the Middle East really stop them from voting for a party that, well, mostly looks after their immediate economic interests?

Rishi Sunak isn’t about to call for a ceasefire. So Muslim voters are unlikely to suddenly change allegiance, en masse, to the Tories. Lib Dem leader Ed Davey has made some noises about a ‘pause’ in the conflict but has stopped short of demanding a ceasefire.

So, the two main parties don’t appear like they are about to benefit from the ‘Muslim vote’. Even a council by-election in an area that is 25 per cent Muslim at the end of last month showed very little decline in the Labour vote.

Little else would change if George Galloway fires up his old Respect party bandwagon, which had some very limited success after the invasion of Iraq (one MP and 19 councillors), and a few more Labour figures step down. One recent attempt to register an Islamic party has already been rejected by the electoral commission.

And yes, of course, many Labour voters besides the party’s Muslim bloc might want to see a ceasefire. But will they, too, in little less than a year’s time not vote at all or lend their vote to the two other main parties who are also not demanding a ceasefire?

The Tories have been incapable of avoiding drama in recent years. Long after the war is over, another Tory MP will get nicked for rape or something else that offends the public. The news cycle will move on.

Starmer is playing a good hand. He can comfortably afford to live with the current levels of grumbling. The polls are unlikely to shift very much, if at all. He’ll likely survive, too, if there are damages to ‘community relations’ with the country’s Muslim population.

There is no pressing electoral need for him to change track, regardless of all the posturing among figures in his party of whom no one has ever heard, about a conflict over which he has absolutely no influence.