Following last weekend’s communal rally against antisemitism, it is extraordinary that Rabbi Gabriel Kanter-Webber chose not to focus his energies on the reasons for the rally itself: the hatred, intimidation, anti-Jewish hostility, and extremist rhetoric that have become increasingly normalised on Britain’s streets since 7 October, but instead on attacking fellow Jews, Jewish organisations, non-Jewish public figures, and political organisations articulating concerns that are plainly shared by many within the British Jewish community. (Click here to read his piece in Vashti, an online magazine catering to the “British Left”).
Rather than engaging substantively with those concerns, Rabbi Kanter-Webber instead sought to politically and morally discredit the individuals and organisations raising them.
In doing so, he attempted to create the false impression that the National Jewish Assembly is merely an extension of one individual and his personal opinions.
It is not.
The NJA has always comprised staff, advisers, members, supporters, activists, and Young NJA participants representing a broad spectrum of Jewish opinion and political thought. Gary Mond stepped down from his leadership role last year, yet critics continue attempting to reduce an entire organisation and the concerns it raises into crude political labels rather than engaging honestly with the substance of those concerns.
The treatment of Gary Mond illustrates this problem clearly. Following controversy surrounding social media activity connected to discussions around Islamist extremism and the aftermath of terrorist attacks in Europe, Gary Mond resigned from the Board of Deputies and later faced an attempt by the Charity Commission to disqualify him as a trustee of JNF UK.
Rabbi Kanter-Webber selectively amplified critical comments made during the subsequent Tribunal proceedings while omitting the central fact that Gary Mond ultimately won his appeal. He likewise omitted the tribunal’s conclusion that disqualification was neither proportionate nor necessary, together with the judge’s recognition that the comments in question were motivated by genuine concerns regarding Islamist extremism and antisemitism.
Reasonable people may disagree with aspects of Gary Mond’s language or political outlook. However, selectively presenting only the most condemnatory excerpts while concealing the outcome and broader findings creates a fundamentally misleading impression.
Comments made by Rabbi Kanter-Webber, and amplified by Jewish Voice for Liberation, formerly Jewish Voice for Labour, suggest that Jews expressing concerns about antisemitism, Islamist extremism, communal security, immigration failures, or the increasing influence of sectarian politics can simply be dismissed as racist, Islamophobic, or “far right” if they fall outside certain progressive political perspectives.
Such rhetoric is divisive, inflammatory, and entirely unbecoming of serious communal leadership.
Antisemitism in Britain did not begin on 7 October 2023, nor did the demonisation of Israel and the increasingly explicit use of anti-Zionism as a vehicle for hostility toward Jews. However, since the Hamas atrocities, this phenomenon has spiralled dramatically. Britain has witnessed an unprecedented surge in antisemitic incidents, repeated harassment of visibly Jewish individuals, open glorification of terrorist organisations on British streets, relentless anti-Israel agitation that frequently descends into hostility toward Jews, intimidation targeting Jewish students and institutions, and the growing normalisation of extremist rhetoric within public life.
These concerns are not confined to any political fringe. They are shared, quietly and increasingly openly, by many British Jews who feel growing alarm at the direction of public discourse, communal intimidation, and the normalisation of anti-Israel hostility masquerading as legitimate activism.
It is therefore extraordinary that a rabbi should appear so willing to publicly inflame division within the Jewish community by caricaturing and maligning fellow Jews, Jewish organisations, and communal figures whose political outlook differs from his own.
At a time of unprecedented pressure on British Jews, religious leadership should carry with it a responsibility to encourage dialogue, communal cohesion, and serious engagement across political and denominational differences, not ideological denunciation and public vilification. Such a position also requires the maturity and respect to accept that sincere and committed Jews may hold differing political views, and that those differences should be addressed through thoughtful discussion and respectful engagement rather than caricature and condemnation.
Separately, Jewish Voice for Liberation, formerly Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL), chose to frame and promote Rabbi Kanter-Webber’s article alongside the increasingly common claim that combating antisemitism requires “stopping the conflation of Judaism and Zionism”, as though Jewish attachment to Israel were some modern political aberration rather than a core component of Jewish identity, history, and religious consciousness stretching back millennia. (Click here to read JVL’s forward to Rabbi Kanter-Webber’s piece).
That position stands in stark contrast to the views consistently articulated by Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis and his predecessor, Lord Rabbi Jonathan Sacks — figures of immense scholarship, moral seriousness, international respect, and intellectual depth, both of whom recognised clearly that anti-Zionism has increasingly become a contemporary vehicle for antisemitism, and that the connection between Judaism, Jewish identity, and Zionism is intrinsic rather than incidental.
As Lord Sacks repeatedly warned, denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination increasingly functions as the modern form through which hostility toward Jews is expressed and legitimised. Both also understood that genuine Jewish leadership requires humility, responsibility, and a commitment to maintaining communal cohesion even amidst profound disagreement, particularly at moments of acute pressure and division within the Jewish community.
The NJA will not be intimidated into silence. We will continue confronting the demonisation of Israel, antisemitism, and Islamist extremism which has been a major driver behind the sharp rise in antisemitism across Britain since 7 October. We will continue defending the right of British Jews to express legitimate concerns openly and responsibly, without being smeared or vilified for doing so.
Despite the nature of Rabbi Kanter-Webber’s intervention, the NJA remains open to serious and respectful dialogue. At a time when British Jews face growing hostility and insecurity, communal responsibility demands engagement and debate rather than public caricature and ideological point scoring.
