"Gay Girl in Damascus" at it again?

Tom MacMaster, author of the fictional blog A Gay Girl in Damascus, has been accused of posting comm

It seems Tom MacMaster, the US graduate student behind the lesbian blogger hoax, has never heard the phrase "once bitten, twice shy".

He was subject to international criticism after he was unmasked as the true identity behind the Syrian blogger Amina Arraf. Posing as a lesbian activist, MacMaster's writings drew a wide following around the world, and highlighted humanitarian and political issues in the Middle East. But he was "outed" (if you'll excuse the pun) when he claimed "Amina" had been abducted by Syrian security services -- sparking a man-hunt which ended with MacMaster himself.

Now the beleaguered blogger has been accused of a similar trick, after he admitted that a comment defending his actions on the liberal Jewish news website Mondoweiss was written under a false name.

"Miriam Umm Ibni" wrote a supportive message about MacMaster, saying that although "he misguidedly placed himself in the guise of an Arab woman...he did so from real compassion... He is an individual with no budget, trying to bring attention to issues through writing."

But the post was found to originate from the same IP address used by the American blogger, raising allegations that he was again assuming the identity of an Arab woman to make a point. In an email later posted by the editors of Mondoweiss, MacMaster admitted Miriam Umm Ibni was an assumed identity, but claimed he was not behind the comments.

"A friend of mine who would really like to remain nameless recently posted a comment defending me on your site. She used a pseudonym as she is a committed activist on the Palestine cause as well as a fellow international student here at the University of Edinburgh. To post it, she used the same wireless connection I use. She was, after all, visiting my wife and I at the time."

Emanuelle Degli Esposti is a freelance journalist currently living and working in London. She has written for the Sunday Express, the Daily Telegraph and the Economist online.

Emanuelle Degli Esposti is the editor and founder of The Arab Review, an online journal covering arts and culture in the Arab world. She also works as a freelance journalist specialising in the politics of the Middle East.

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Why relations between Theresa May and Philip Hammond became tense so quickly

The political imperative of controlling immigration is clashing with the economic imperative of maintaining growth. 

There is no relationship in government more important than that between the prime minister and the chancellor. When Theresa May entered No.10, she chose Philip Hammond, a dependable technocrat and long-standing ally who she had known since Oxford University. 

But relations between the pair have proved far tenser than anticipated. On Wednesday, Hammond suggested that students could be excluded from the net migration target. "We are having conversations within government about the most appropriate way to record and address net migration," he told the Treasury select committee. The Chancellor, in common with many others, has long regarded the inclusion of students as an obstacle to growth. 

The following day Hammond was publicly rebuked by No.10. "Our position on who is included in the figures has not changed, and we are categorically not reviewing whether or not students are included," a spokesman said (as I reported in advance, May believes that the public would see this move as "a fix"). 

This is not the only clash in May's first 100 days. Hammond was aggrieved by the Prime Minister's criticisms of loose monetary policy (which forced No.10 to state that it "respects the independence of the Bank of England") and is resisting tougher controls on foreign takeovers. The Chancellor has also struck a more sceptical tone on the UK's economic prospects. "It is clear to me that the British people did not vote on June 23 to become poorer," he declared in his conference speech, a signal that national prosperity must come before control of immigration. 

May and Hammond's relationship was never going to match the remarkable bond between David Cameron and George Osborne. But should relations worsen it risks becoming closer to that beween Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Like Hammond, Darling entered the Treasury as a calm technocrat and an ally of the PM. But the extraordinary circumstances of the financial crisis transformed him into a far more assertive figure.

In times of turmoil, there is an inevitable clash between political and economic priorities. As prime minister, Brown resisted talk of cuts for fear of the electoral consequences. But as chancellor, Darling was more concerned with the bottom line (backing a rise in VAT). By analogy, May is focused on the political imperative of controlling immigration, while Hammond is focused on the economic imperative of maintaining growth. If their relationship is to endure far tougher times they will soon need to find a middle way. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.