Is a foreign policy revolution taking place?
July 31st, 2010
Do Dave’s trips indicate a big change of emphasis?
July’s been a busy month for David Cameron on the foreign affairs front with visits to the United States, Turkey and most recently, India. In all three, he’s been effusive towards his hosts and strongly positive about relations between Britain and the countries he’s been in. That’s all par for the course in diplomacy. What’s much less so is the strength of his criticism directed elsewhere: implicitly towards France and Germany for blocking Turkey’s application to join the EU, and overtly towards Israel over Gaza and Pakistan over terrorism.
There are of course various different games all going on at once here. The point about Turkey’s membership is in part the kind of tactical positioning that often goes on in the EU, ensuring that someone else takes the blame for blocking reform or development. It’s also about frustrating federalist ambitions.
Taken together though, there’s a strong indication that the government is looking to significantly refocus Britain’s foreign policy priorities, away from the legacy of the second half of the 20th century and towards the expected developments of the 21st.
Despite his ‘junior partner’ comments, it’s notable that various members of the government have been quite firm on seeing 2015 as a deadline for withdrawal from Afghanistan (which is, it has to be said, well over a decade after the 9/11 attacks), a timeline which looks independent of American priorities. It’s difficult to imagine Tony Blair making that kind of remark or being so outspoken about Israel’s actions in Gaza (something that will also have been noticed across the Atlantic).
The criticism of elements of the Pakistani authorities for their ambiguous attitude towards terrorist elements in their country ties in with the Afghanistan situation but also contrasts both with his statements in Turkey - a very different kind of Islamic country - and the regional superpower, India. It’s not difficult to see what the increasingly important relationships of tomorrow are seen as being.
Those relationships are with the rising powers where there should be some degree of affinity and shared interest. Turkey and India are, unusually for their regions, both democracies, both relatively secular, both growing economically, both have geopolitical instability and threats on their doorstep and both are big - if it joined, Turkey may have the biggest population in the EU within 20 years; India has comfortably more people than the EU and USA put together.
All this isn’t to say that the old priorities will no longer be seen as important. For one thing, there’s the geographic fact that the UK is a European and Atlantic country. For another, the EU, NATO and historic ties aren’t going to simply disappear. Even so, the visits and the (un)diplomatic language suggest at least a loosening of those old alliances in favour of a more multi-tiered approach. Not before time, some will say. Perhaps so, but difficult and potentially dangerous manoeuvring which will call for careful handling at high levels, especially when there are already more than enough obstacles to trip up the government on the home front.
David Herdson
MessageSpace Advertising
Kerfuffle! Hullabaloo! David Miliband is a hippopotamus! globule
Bulletin via TMZ - dateline Seaside Heights, NJ
SNOOKIE ARRESTED!
The “star” of the “reality” TV show “Jersey Shore” (which does for New Jersey what “Deliverance” did for Geogia) taken into custody for disorderly conduct. This only days after NJ Gov. Chris Christie publically - and politically? - attacked the admittedly deeply annoying super-skank.
S&S, when will the TYRANNY that is YOUR gubernatoral “Big Boy” cease to plague the citizens of New Jersey? The good, the bad and the ugly (and for Snookie it’s 2)?
AND what role did the Gov, the NJ GOP and you personally play in psupplying her with an illicit funnel?!?
Remember: the coverup is always worse than the crime!
B
- “Is a foreign policy revolution taking place?”
Nope.
Getting all wrapped up in foreign policy, and frequent trips abroad, is a very common phenomenon among political leaders in difficulty in the domestic arena.
What is quite remarkable is that FM Dave, in his first visit to the US, chose to launch a scathing attack on his neighbouring country. And this is the guy meant to be representing the “Whole Yookay” on the world stage?
Can you imagine Sarkozy spending an entire Washington trip slagging off Brittany, or Merkel joining Obama in slandering the Bavarian government?
Cameron is a toad. “Respect Agenda” R.I.P.
Slightly more on topic . . .
Seems to me that there may be coordination between what Prime Minster Camaeron is saying on his Grand Tour, and what General Petraeus is starting to do in Afghanistan.
Similar to former PM Gordon Brown and Gen Petraeus in Iraq?
Meanwhile back at the ranch, on “Washington Week in Review” on PBS tonight, discussion was regarding statment by the Wikileaks guru that Afghan sources outed in leaked US DOD docs were “colatteral damage” which is NOT great PR to put it mildly, and which helps military in short term.
Howevger, the long-range outlook re: support for US war against Taleban is NOT good from current vantage point. Over 100 Dem defectors in recent US House vote on war funding. And even when you consider that for many if not most of these were given political cover by GOP congressional support (they voted NO knoowing funding would pass anyway, thus relieving them from responsiblity for blocking support for our troops in the field) the fact they did it at all (to impress base Dems in their districts) is telling,
AND the signs that more and more Republicans are wanting off the bus are just as clear.
Here in Seattle, big Afghan War story is that one of the two US Navy sailor who were killed driving out of Kabul unescorted in an their SUV was from Seattle. His parents are obviously devastated, and just as confused as everybody else, which makes a totally rotten situation even worse.
That said, there is little evidence of active opposition to the war in Afghanistan, even in a liberal hotbed like Seattle. Cause there’s no draft, and the military itself remains for the war, if hardly what you’d call gung ho about it. And there’s a signifiant miliary presence in the Seattle/Puget Sound area; Army and Air Force down at Joint Base Lewis-McChord (formerly Ft Lewis and McChord AFB) near Tacoma; the Bremerton Navy Yard and Bangor Trident sub base in Kitsap Co just across the Sound from Seattle; Everett Naval Station and Whidbey Island NAS north of Seattle.
Media-savvy PM runs foreign policy while his socially awkward Chancellor lords it over domestic policy.
To be honest, it does sound vaguely familiar.
3. Your continued use of the term “First Minister” for David Cameron is like going on a blind date with the word DESPERATE tattooed on your forehead.
If you wish your comments to be taken seriously, perhaps desist from these verbal tics and twitches, which just point you up as cranky, obsessive, and, well, Somewhat Nitty.
ON topic, (and sawadee kap from Bangkok), I think the answer is: Well, Sorta.
It’s not quite a revolution but it is certainly a refreshing stepchange from the Blairite poodlism and Brownian chaos. I like having a prime minister who speaks blunt truths: Gaza IS a prison camp - this is what most of the world clearly and correctly believes (including most Britons) and the Israelis should hear it once in a while from a major leader.
And Pakistan DOES face both ways on terror, and it can’t go on.
I disagree with Cameron on Turkey but I reckon he truly believes what he says, and there is a logic to it. Fair enough. It is also clever europoliticking, as David H notes.
One final thing: Afghanistan. I read the last thread with pleasure (an amusing fistfight between left and right, pb having one of its better days), I didn’t join in cause I was too exhausted from the Naughty Protest.
But I notice that tim, in his Mersey-based self-righteousness now COMPLETELY FAILS TO MENTION AFGHANISTAN EVER.
Up until about a fortnight ago, he was gungho for this Labour war, it was vital to our security, anyone who doubted it was a yellow- carnation-twirling coward. Suddenly, when it is clear even to the dumbest dumb-ass in Dumbarton that the war is Lost, and Pointless, he has gone all quiet on the subject.
Why is that, tim?
OK, off to the swimming pool to think about plots. And stuff. Kap.
David Cameron should listen carefully to the mandarins, less about what grand aims to have and more about how to achieve them. Two trips, two silly slips. He was far too strong in his language about Gaza and needlessly stoked a row that overshadowed his main message in Turkey, which was calculated, correct and in line with Britain’s interests. By saying Pakistan instead of “elements in Pakistan” he did the same thing all over again.
This is not about truth: Gazans live in unpleasant conditions largely controlled by the Israelis and the Pakistani government does sit Janus-faced on Islamic terrorism. It is about not hindering your main objectives by enterin into distracting fights.
6. But Sean, Dave Cameron is, de facto, the First Minister of England. Nothing more. Nothing less.
If it waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, then it is a duck.
In Washington, Dave was waddling like the First Minister of England, quacking like the First Minister of England, and swimming like the First Minister of England. Therefore, he is the First Minister of England. End of.
David Herdon missed a wee bit from his article:- “… the strength of his criticism directed elsewhere: implicitly towards France and Germany…” … and explicitly towards Scotland.
I really cannot think of a precedent for a head of government using his first trip to visit the US president to join said US president in launching a scathing, thoroughly hypocritical, full-frontal attack on part of the very state that he is meant to be in Washington to represent. It is mind-boggling in its crassness.
PS. as far as “verbal tics” go, I am one of the PBers who was around when you just could not write a post without using the word ‘bukk@ke’. You have had various other phases too. And don’t get me started on your own “cranky, obsessive” behaviour. You live in a glass house.
I’m in Mumbai again at the mo (company’s got another share issue coming up (to raise some capital for acquisitioms) so it’s be nice to bankers time). I was chatting with some of our top guys and our merchant bankers yesterday about Cameron’s visit; they were very impressed by his level of brown-nosing and, in reference to his comments about Pakistan, unanimously liked him. I pointed out that he’s a very clever politician and that he’d chosen his words carefully so they could be interpreted without any criticism of the Pakistani government; they concurred and seemed to like him even more!
5. John L - “To be honest, it does sound vaguely familiar.”
Of course it is familiar John. All English first ministers from now on must be Blair copycats. It is in the rule book, so visit your local library (infants’ section) and borrow a copy: it is called ‘The Three Blairs: CamiBlair, CleggiBlair and MiliBlair’. So much for “choice”, when they are all the same.
If you think that Blair/Brown and Cameron/Osborne fit your descriptions of “media-savvy”/”socially awkward”, then you are just gonna love the Miliband/Balls civil partnership in the next episode of ‘Downing Street - The Docusoap’.
9. Stuart - can you remember the last time a neighbour released a mass murdering terrorist by mistake ?
Respect is a two way street - but not in Nit world - everything can be blamed on London and nothing is Holyroods fault.
Cameron is proving to be gaffe-prone, as well as ill-advised. The problem with the Pakistan comments is not what he said, nor how he said it. It’s where he did. Staggeringly ill-judged and, indeed, cowardly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7918994/Tax-credits-and-benefits-could-be-replaced-with-negative-income-tax-under-shake-up.html
‘Scotland braced for winter of discontent’
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/scotland-braced-for-winter-of-discontent-1.1045059
3 - On the foreign policy stage, David Cameron is your representative. It was a decision for which he was responsible, but which he had no power to change and with which he vehemently disagreed. Complaining that he should point the finger of responsibility at the devolved level where it belongs on the ground that it was a Scottish decision is to wrap a saltire around a turd.
Shooting from the hip isn’t a bad idea. It gives him kudos domestically and internationally it gets him noticed.
Most of us were fed up with 13 years of Labour’s right wingery -unquestioning support for Israel and craven devotion to every Dr Strangeloves in The White House-and have been craving a leader with the bottle to sound European. Bravo Cammo!
(Stuart is right though that publicly siding with the US against Scotland was crass but nobody’s perfect )
15. antifrank - “It was a decision for which he was responsible, but which he had no power to change… “
How can somebody be “responsible” for a decision over which he had no power? The first minister of England has no role to play in the Scottish criminal law system. Except of course, to slander it on his first trip to Washington.
On the foreign policy stage, David Cameron is supposed to be our representative. But he himself has chosen to abrogate that responsibility. He must learn to live with the grave consequences of that decision.
FM Dave really ought to know better than to fling turds at the saltire from across the Atlantic. Blair would never have been so stupid. Even the less talented Gordon Brown was canny enough to totally avoid uttering a word of criticism of the compassionate release.
The view from Northern Ireland
http://threethousandversts.blogspot.com/2010/07/cameron-lockerbie-bomber-and-devolution.html
17 - He is responsible because he is the leader of the United Kingdom’s government, the state at international law. A decision with which the US was extremely unhappy took place within the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction. He was expected to comment on it and comment he did.
An exact comparison is where the Governor of Texas is about to execute a British national. The British government would have no compunction about making representations to the US President if necessary and the US President would be expected to comment in appropriate cases.
Your real beef is that the SNP (note, not Scotland) are being fingered for having made a shockingly poor decision based on the flimsiest of medical evidence. Suck it up.
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/66553,news-comment,news-politics,the-mole-cameron-is-right-to-be-a-loudmouth-on-pakistan
Scott. Rather than this weird habit of linking to blogs written by people so obscure that even their mothers haven’t heard of them why not give us your own thoughts?
21. Roger, you think a direct quote from the Belfast Telegraph is obscure?
Why not read some of the links before criticising?
19. antifrank - “… the state at international law.”
Wrong.
There are three distinct legal states recognised in public and in private international law: England&Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland.
You really ought to read up on your Conflict of Laws.
http://assets.cambridge.org/052178/2600/sample/0521782600ws.pdf
There is no such thing as “the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction”. There is E&W jurisdiction (in which FM Dave does have a role), NI jurisdiction, and Scottish jurisdiction.
Please note that the Scottish government is the democratically-elected executive of the Scottish people, irrespective of whether the SNP or the Lib-Labs are in office. If you attack a country’s government while on a high-profile trip overseas, then you attack the whole country.
The decision was not “shockingly poor”. It was the right decision under existing Scots law. A law which was in fact brought onto the statute books by the last Tory government to rule Scotland.
#3 Stuart Dickinson
I appreciate where you are and what your political perspective is, odd though both may seem to me.
Prime Minister Cameron, whilst in Washington correctly criticised an appalling error by a couple of jumped-up publicly-funded twits who live 400 miles from Westminster and who have been arrogant and pig-headed to admit that they made a mistake and/or had the wool pulled over their (willing) eyes.
The most useful things that all those involved could do is:
a) admit they screwed up
b) shut up
Foreign policy matters have nothing to do with the bloated parish council in Holyrood and trying to act as if they have some part to play in them is farcical - all they have done so far is to cover themselves in world-wide opprobrium for looking and acting utterly incompetent.
Pygmies in every sense.
SD..A little tetchy for a Saturday morn…perhaps you should boil your sporran for a few hours more before adding the disgusting thing called a haggis..it wont taste any better but it will keep you from howling in those barren cobbled windswept streets..
19. antifrank - “An exact comparison is where the Governor of Texas is about to execute a British national. The British government would have no compunction about making representations to the US President if necessary and the US President would be expected to comment in appropriate cases.”
Nonsense.
A comparison would be where the Governor of Texas is about to execute an English national. The newly-elected US President then makes a very high-profile trip to London to meet the English head of government. During this trip, this US President slanders the Texas Governor and his administration ceaselessly, in press conferences, and in public and private briefings. The US President then smiles like the cat who got the cream for all the cameras.
On returning home, the US President wonders why his party only got 17% of the vote in Texas, and only has one (out of 59) Texas legislators. Tis no mystery.
23. Stuart, what do you personally think the outcome of the appeal would have been likely to be if early release had not come first? This isn’t a point scoring question, it’s just that I would expect that you are probably better informed about the case than most people who sound of in print or blogs.
#23 SD
Anyone who murders 267 people deserves to rot in a deeply unpleasant jail for teh rest of their lives (at best)
Now, whether the *right* man was convicted is, to my mind, rather doubtful, and it’s undeniably true that he cannot have acted alone.
That’s no reason to send Megrahi back to Libya because a single GP (he’s selected and paid for) says he’s dying.
It was done to stick two fingers up at Westminster and Brown (only - NO other reason) and they deserve every bit of loathing and scorn that’s going to be dumped on them for many years to come.
As for the jump-ed up Senators who seem to think they can demand anyone and everyone to appear before them - someone needs to give them some VERY straight talking-to.
27 Soun off. Sorry.
“Prime Minister Cameron, whilst in Washington correctly criticised an appalling error by a couple of jumped-up publicly-funded twits who live 400 miles from Westminster….”
What a silly and childish commernt.
30 Roger…how long have you been visiting PB…
23 - There are multiple legal systems in the UK. That does not equate to multiple states. Conflict of laws, which governs legal problems dealing with different legal systems as they affect individuals, has nothing to do with public international law. The key words in the passage you cite are “for present purposes”. It’s a good general rule not to quote things that you don’t understand.
Scotland is a part of the UK. You may regret that. You may devoutly wish it otherwise. But it is. It has no seat at the United Nations. It has no vote in the EU. The Scottish Parliament’s powers derive from devolution from Westminster and could, in theory at least, be repealed post haste by Westminster.
The voice at international level for Scotland is the United Kingdom government. That is led by David Cameron.
So your little homily about the status of the Scottish administration, while no doubt composed to the strains of the film score of Braveheart, is simply wrong. L’etat, c’est pas Alex Salmond.
On the substance of the decision itself, you choose not to address the reason why I label it shockingly poor. The final report is explicit that no expert was prepared to say that Megrahi’s life expectancy was probably 3 months or less. A non-expert (unnamed) doctor with unknown specialism, if any, was noted as believing that his condition had deteriorated. The report continues to state that it was therefore reasonable to assume that the prognosis was of 3 months or less, but does not state even that the non-expert doctor had advised that. The evidence for release was practically non-existent.
Scotland is not (and arguably never has been) a country.
A *nation* yes, but only prior to 1605. Since then, it’s been a fully-integrated part of the UK, under a single sovereign and with a single Westminster parliament.
That Bliar screwed-up the Constitution right-royally should come as no surprise, since absolutely everything he ever had anything to do with has proved to be an absolutely disaster, costing a fortune, based on extreme short-termism and causing damage and difficulties everywhere for a long time after he’s passed by.
Such as Cherie.
I’d like to see Westminster abolish Holyrood and reduce its powers to strictly trivial matters,
OR
they have an additional sales tax on every item clearly labelled as ‘Scottish Govt Tax’ and designed to raise everything they spend above and beyond the English average spend per person.
You want a socialist ‘paradise’? God luck to you - but you damn well pay for it.
27. Henry Rogers - … what do you personally think the outcome of the appeal would have been likely to be if early release had not come first?
I realise that you are not point-scoring Henry. After many years of blogging, I think that I can tell the difference between trolls, agitators, aspiring comedians, and genuine enquirers.
There is not a single doubt in my mind (or the minds of any informed person I have talked to) that Megrahi would have been released by the Court of Criminal Appeal.
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission does not take decisions lightly.
http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293
34. He would have been freed on appeal, so the original trial verdict was a mistake?
I know in your world criticism of anything Scottish is heresy, so what went wrong at the original trial? Were there English lawyers present?
http://dizzythinks.net/2010/07/lesson-learned-sort-of.html
23 Scotland is not, legally, a foreign country. There is no such thing as Scottish citizenship, or Scottish embassies, or a Scottish seat at the UN, there is no need for extradition between Scotland and the rest of the UK, and the Parliament at Westminster could pass whatever laws it liked relating to Scotland. Whatever autonomy Scotland has is entirely a matter for the UK Parliament to determine.
Scotland has its own legal system, but then, all of the States of the US have their own legal systems, without their being foreign countries.
IMO, it is entirely reasonable for Cameron to criticise the decision to release Megrahi. If indeed, Megrahi was likely to be released on appeal, then the law should have been allowed to take its course.
Only skimmed the thread but it seems awfully angst-filled.
But fear not, for at 10am we have P3, and then at 1pm, qualifying. Hooray!
Its funny how the Scots dont liked to be blamed for releasing a mass murderer by an Englishman but are quite happy to take hundreds of billions to bail out their banks when they go bust.
Cameron was sucking up to India, if it means screwing over Pakistan then so be it. We have nothing to lose.
Perhaps the appeal should have gone ahead..if he had been released then the Scots were off the hook..if he had not been released on appeal then after a suitable time lag the compassionate card could have been played…but that is all a little bit political…maybe there were things that would have been discussed at the appeal that we were not supposed to hear..
37 yes the SNP and salmond in particular are enourmously prickly about criticism. Cameron (and anybody else whose country was connected to lockerbie and in terrorism in general ) has a right to express an opinion on the release .
Utterly OT: people keep following me on twitter. I don’t have a twitter account. Is this a strange e-mail scam, or have they just spelt the address wrong?
36 - From the opposite political perspective, another commentator has also been lamenting the opposition’s poor positioning:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/30/labour-opposition-blairites-in-power
I don’t know if Megrahi is innocent or guilty, but I’m sure that Obama and Cameron do. Therefore, if he is innocent, their pious rage is unforgiveable, (and if he is guilty, I would suggest that better evidence is available than that which secured his conviction).
34. In which case, and if the Scottish justice system is so marvellous, why not just hold the Appeal trial? You’re usually a good commentator but on this one, you just sound like a football fan desperately arguing that the knee-high, studs-up tackle wasn’t just not a red card but was a perfectly fair challenge.
The decision to release was the wrong one, as Annabel Goldie said at the time. You’ve been happy to point up splits between the Westminster- and Holyrood-based Tories in the past (which is, after all, what devolution allows for); why not acknowledge that Dave is simply following the party line this time?
Linking it back to the article, it seems to me that a fairly fundamental reassessment has gone on at the highest levels as to which countries matter to Britain’s interests and which don’t. The US still does (but not as much), Turkey does (and will increase in importance), India does (and will increase even more), Pakistan does (but only for the moment and only if it will get its act together and do what it says it’s going to).
43 Apart from joining the Euro (which clearly won’t happen) I think that Cameron really is Blair as he would have liked to have been, had he not been constrained by the Labour Party.
46 - *shudders*
45 - I regard a reassessment as long overdue. I’m hopeful that the interest in Turkey might mean that Britain properly engages with the Black Sea littoral with a view to getting it embedded in a European orbit. That is strongly in Britain’s and the EU’s interests.
What worries me is that while the strategy looks quite good, the execution has so far looked poor. That does not augur well.
On topic, and sharing some of my views, here’s a piece from Labour Uncut:
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2010/07/29/david-cameron-is-going-berserk-says-kevin-meagher/#more-2124
Minus 1000 points for Mr Meagher for mentioning the Bullingdon Club though.
48. I’d agree with all that. Turkey is pivotal in a quite littoral sense (ahem). It’s at the crossroads and is the gateway east and west to us - it’s also the gateway north and south to and from Russia. It’s the cultural gateway from here to the middle East and the cultural gateway to Europe from the Middle East.
45. The decision to release was only wrong if you dispute the fact that it was thought he was going to die imminently. I haven’t seen any evidence to suggest this.
50. I love the way it says “Kevin Meagher was special adviser to the Labour secretary of state for Northern Ireland”. Presumably that’s Shaun Woodward - but maybe that isn’t a link to advertise on Labour Uncut?
Without wishing to get tangled in (another) Scotland vs the row argument I would note that conflict of law is an incredibly complex and subtle subject and cutting and pasting something found on the Internet (when there are godd counter-scholarly arguments (see Dicey et al) does neither you or the subject any credit.
33 HD2. “Scotland is not (and arguably never has been) a country.
A *nation* yes, but only prior to 1605. Since then, it’s been a fully-integrated part of the UK, under a single sovereign and with a single Westminster parliament.”
When making sweeping historical statements it’s always prudent to get the basics correct.
The Scottish Parliament remained in existence until the Act of Union in 1707 when the United Kingdom of Great Britain came in to existence.
52.was directed to David at 46.
47. Which begs the question, WTF was he doing standing for Labour in 1983? In some senses, I feel a bit sorry for him in that he was a Christian Democrat with no natural home.
One can argue that the remaining ‘right’ in the Labour Party after the SDP split off saw that break as a dead-end and that the red side would come round in the end. However, an opposite and more than equal case could be made for the Tories. Yes, the early years of the Thatcher government were hard but there was a substantial One Nation block within the Conservatives which contained the social compassion of the left without the economic collectivism. Surely that would have been closer to both Blair and government?
Enough of all this political claptrap. Who’s got a tip for the Stewards Cup?
What I don’t understand is, when Scotland has the population and economy of a large county like Yorkshire, why Stuart Dickson should be so utterly flabbergasted when the majority of the posters on here don’t understand/care about/taker seriously the ins and outs of Scottish politics.
Were it not for Stuart Dixon’s continual & repetitive input I feel Scotland might be as irrelevant to PB as it is the public at large.
54. LOL! He said he was a teacher for many years at a top Scottish public school.
Perhaps standards are higher in the public sector!
52. Agreed, but the evidence that he *was* going to die was less than compelling, which given the severity of the crime for which he was convicted, it should have needed to have been, for him to be released on compassionate grounds.
There’s also the assumption which is being made that the Scottish judicial process is fixed in stone. The delays in bringing the appeal to trial (and ultimately, not bringing it to trial), was itself a denial of justice and a serious flaw. For probably the biggest crime committed in Scotland in the last century, one would have thought that a bit more importance might have been placed on getting the right result, including fast-tracking an appeal where necessary.
57 - Well i’ve backed Secret Asset, which will ensure it will take a serene, if not Buddhist approach to the race and finish last.
61 I’ve had a couple of tips for Johnny Mudball (10/1) and Parisian Pyramid (20/1)
I see Stuart Dickson has hijacked yet another thread, with the usual confusing of Scotland with the SNP.
Who cares about the 1.3 billion people in India, or the ten thousand troops in Afghanistan, or the contemporary councils of europe: a few SNP bods are offended and affronted by something, so lets pretend Scotland was attacked. (SNP isn’t Scotland).
Obviously nobody cares if some bellend politician is ridiculed for his hubris (that’s politician ridiculed not scotland). So lets get all precious and call it an attack on Scotland when it is in fact an attack on a politician’s decision. What a great idea.
Then we’ll troll the internet, ruining good conversation, annoying even those who sympathise with the SNP position (note SNP not Scotland) and generally look like a parochial, obsessive loser.
Jack W @54:
:pedant:
Src: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tender_of_Union
I fear that far too many PB criticisms of the SNP are extended to Scotland and Scots as a whole. Whose purpose does this serve, I wonder.
I’ve been out of the loop for the past week or so.
Did we ever get the poll showing the leads/shares that William/Wayne was hyping up?
62 - Thanks.
54/64. Pedent II.
The United Kingdom didn’t come into existance until 1801.
66 No, we certainly did not. There were no such polls.
astateofdenmark @5
Spot on - I’ve put Mr Dickson on Ignore this week.
The continual equating of Scotland with the SNP is boring, clearly not a fact since they have a similar vote share to the LDs/Tories who don’t pretend to be Scotland and finally - it’s a stupid position to take as it undermines anything else he says.
Mr Kelly [also now on Ignore] also takes a similar umbrage at any criticism of the SNP despite being on the opposite end of the political spectrum.
A bit of perspective would do SNP advocates a lot of good if they want to be listened to.
*yawns*
68 David H. Incorrect. UK MK I was the United Kingdom of Great Britain from 1707 until 1801 when the UK MK II became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
As someone who is an admirer of the Scottish Legal System (I think the not proven concept is great)
But when it came to the whole Megrahi appeal, the Scottish Legal System didn’t cover themselves in glory.
If he was palpably innocent as the some have suggested, why wasn’t his appeal allowed to go the full course?
In the eyes of the law, he is still Scotland’s biggest mass murderer.
69 - I assume OGH gave him a red card.
Polls smolls, the election is nearly 5 years away and we don’t know under what electoral system and indeed we may have a formal/informal electoral pact.
Just a couple of things , one thread related, one not.
On The Today programme there was an interesting discussion about Cameron’s comments about Pakistan (and the internal divisions within Pakistan re the intelligence services and the Pakistan Govt). I was at about 8.30 ish It’ll be on the Today prog website.
At the end of the Today prog, Michael Portillo and Sarah Teather? were on. Both say the Coalition will run the full 5 years.
73 no red card I am aware of, although I don’t know everything (just almost everything)
The thousnad year coalition has a long way to run yet, the next time Labour get a sniff of power, human beings will have evolved to have skin impervious to socialism.
75 - Amen.
Re, Cameron and Pakistan I’m delighted he has spoken out. I’d like to think he might now follow through on the logic of his arguments and reduce the threat to UK security Pakistan poses by stopping immigration from that country.
OT - I’m just about to watch the final couple episodes of House and have endured 2 series of Mad Men…
Why does anyone think MM is any good? Nothing happens, the main guy is a selfish twat who doesn’t say much of anything so not even naughtily attractive and the rest of the cast I couldn’t give a toss about either.
With House, I LOL, think it’s challenging/OTT dialogue, I care about where the relationships go, wonder where they find all the different plot/diagnoses stories - it couldn’t be more different.
78 To be honest, I decided MM wasn’t for me when someone described it as Sex In The City for men - SITC is about the crappest thing on telly so I would run a mile form a male version of it!
Family Guy said it best ‘a show about 3 hookers and their grandmother’, *snicker*
79 - SITC is great. It taught me a lot about women.
56 I’ve never understood why Blair made his way into the Labour Party at all. He is clearly more at home in the left wing of the Conservative Party.
I could understand it had he come from a Labour background, but his father was a Conservative, and he went to Fettes and Oxford, where he seems to have had very little interest in politics.
80 Boooooooooo! Everyone hiss at TSE all lovin over the haglets in SITC, boooo!
Interesting article, and there does seem to be some recalibration going on, and I also think it makes sense. For several reasons, though, it was unwise to say what he did *while in India* - it’s too obviously sucking up to the host country on what has been billed partly as a trade mission (”I’m critical of your arch-rival, buy our goods”) and the message won’t be read in Pakistan as “the British are annoyed, we must change our policies” but “Britain has decided to side with India”. Given the crucial importance of avoiding Pakistan turning actively hostile, that’s a bad move. It would have been more adroit to let it be known to the UK press that he’d raised concern about Kashmir in India (which he notably didn’t), and then confronted Zardari bluntly on terrorism when he’s in Chequers. As SarahJ says, the message is fine - just not delivered in the right place. There seems a certain tendency, which I remember from Blair in his early days, to grandstand for the sake of it.
David H’s query about why Blair stood for Labour in 1983 is interesting and may get answered in the memoirs. He certainly wasn’t tribally Labour. To add an anecdote: in 1998, he invited me and two other newish MPs to come and tell him how things looked as new Labour MPs. We sdaid things were pretty good, but we were a bit concerned about this and that, blah blah. Out of the blue, he said, “The Labour Party will be the end of the Government, you know”. We gaped at him. “Yes,” he went on, “Every Labour government has in the end been brought down by internal divisions.” As it turned out, he was mistaken, and we were collectively pretty loyal, wisely or not, right into the Valley of Death in 2010, but it showed a curious detachment. (That’s a story I sat on as long as I was an MP.)
But in 1983 it was already obvious that One Nation Christian Democrat Conservatives were going to be swimming agains the tide, while an acute observer would have seen that the Bennite surge in Labour had peaked and the movement was going to be back. Blair was always a strategist, and I think he’ll have realsied that it was better to be on the incoming tide for his viewpoint.
80 – “It taught me a lot about women”
Don’t you mean women’s shoes and handbags ?
65 It winds up Scottish Nationalists, which is always fun.
China closer to becoming second-largest economy
”China’s rapid recent growth has made it increasingly likely that its gross domestic product, in US dollar terms, will be larger this year than Japan’s. However, the vagaries of international currency movements mean such a result is far from assured.”
and
”Even using official data, the baton is seen as likely to be decisively passed this year. In 2009, Japan’s gross domestic product was worth about $5,080bn, while Chinese GDP was initially reported to be not far behind at about $4,900bn.
“Mr Yi is stating the obvious; if China has not already overtaken Japan at this moment in time then it will very soon,” said Arthur Kroeber, managing director of Dragonomics in Beijing.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fd4430da-9bfe-11df-a7a4-00144feab49a.html
David Herdson
Congratulations on a thread and an intro covering what will be very important ground for Britain in the future - its foreign policy. With the making and breaking of nations and empires going on all around us - foreign policy is going to be far more impiortant in the next 50 years than it was in the last.
And - speaking as a socialist - the tories have obviously given at least some thought to a subject Nu Labor displayed dire incompetence - if not actual treason - over.
84 - Yes, and a few other things.
SimonStClare @84
On topic, it’s too soon to tell really, Dave is walking a fine line between seeming assertive and looking like a knee jerk home-town referee desperate to please his hosts.
He’s managed a bit of both.
7.SeanT - We haven’t discussed Afghanistan much recently, but my views haven’t changed.
What you are forgetting is that most of the Afghanistan discussion on here began when a British soldier was killed and half a dozen Tory posters rushed on here to blame his death personally on Bob Ainsworth or Gordon Brown before body was cold.
You’ll notice that has stopped and no one has adopted the same sick ploy from the other side of the political divide thankfully.
Long may it continue.
87 Economic statistics can be suprising:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita
Japan is about 10% poorer, per head, than the UK is.
The same list for exporters is also interesting. Germany exports as much as China, despite having one fifteenth of the population - a phenomenal record.
In fact, the three countries who we think of as the World’s biggest exporters (apart from Germany) Japan, China, and the US, come quite a long way down the list in terms of exports per head.
Right PM, the most important thing is to keep Pakistan on side in the war on terror, nothing must be said or done which will compromise that.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/31/pakistan-security-cancels-uk-visit
Oh shit!
It is remarkable how unrepresentative most of the postings are to this thread if we are to accept as a guide that the English contributions to the Jeremy Vine show yesterday on the Megrahi issue.
Most people can see right through the electoral posturing of a gang of Democratic Senators and are a bit concerned about a UK Prime Minister so incredibly anxious to fawn to his American hosts. Much of the population seems to be having what is known as a “Love Actually” moment - there is a limit to how much humbug we should stomach for the “special relationship”.
It is the Democrats who are making the running on this because the Bush administration were also trying it on with Lybia on oil, nucs and Megrahi - Blair just got there first.
When the jocks complained in 2007 about the “deal in the desert” there was total silence from the opposition front bench in the Commons.
Are we to assume that then BP, ex MI6, Sir Mark Allan restricted his lobbying to the Labour Government?
Finally I think that Cameron has the makings of a great Prime Minister. However he will have to learn that attacking Pakistan in India, Israel in Turkey and Scotland in the US looks weak not strong.
While we’re on the subject of Dave and history/foreign policy lets not forget the fantastically stupid and funny side of our PM.
Is he pandering to the Sates, or is he poorly informed. Or is it both?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KURo3s6N2oo
91. So you still think the Afghan war is a fab idea and we are going to secure a “victory” as long as we sacrifice enough blood and men and treasure.
I’d like it if just one of the idiots who believe this claptrap - perhaps you? - could accurately define what a “victory” in Afghanistan might look like.
Coz they cheap changing the definition of “victory” in Afghanistan.
It’s like being in a soccer match where they say a goal is when you put it in the net, and when that fails to happen, a goal is suddenly redefined as “er, just shooting quite near the net”, and when that fails to occur, a goal is defined as passing the ball into the penalty area, or accidentally hitting the corner flag, or managing not to fall over your own bootlaces before halftime.
What is a “win” in Afghanistan, tim? Cause a war without a valuable and definable victory is by definition unwinnable, and therefore pointless.
Tell me Nur what is that first attracted you to multi-millionaire Asil Nadir?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/on-the-run-since-1993-asil-nadir-will-finally-face-trial-for-16334m-theft-2040024.html
He’s coming home!
96 - A win in Afghanistan/Pakistan is the stabilisation of the countries so that terrorist bases do not exist within either and the nuclear armed Pakistan is not in a state of permanent war with violent Islamism which is dependent on a lawless Afghanistan/NW frontier.
If you think troops should go in and then get pulled out halfway through wars then you may be wise not to support the wars in the first place, I’m sure CND will give you a home, or the Quakers.
Following Cameron’s remarks, Pakistani politicians pointed to the country’s offensive against militants on the border with Afghanistan and the many victims of terrorist bombs in Pakistan.
Cameron defended his comments a day later, saying: “I don’t think the British taxpayer wants me to go around the world saying what people want to hear.”
This article appeared on p4 of the Main section section of the Guardian on Saturday 31 July 2010. It was published on guardian.co.uk at 00.56 BST on Saturday 31 July 2010.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT SEMS TO BE SAYING WHATEVER HIS AUDIENCE OF THE DAY DO WANT TO HEAR. THE QUOTE SEEMS TO SUGGEST THAT DOWNING STREET UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COULD BE SEEN AS A BIG PROBLEM.
Just come back. Business as usual with the Red Bulls topping P3.
92. Germany was actually the world’s biggest exporter until last year - bigger than America, let alone China - which is, as you say, a phenomenal achievement.
However China raced past Germany this year and will soon be unreachably ahead.
For a truly chilling prediction of Chinese supremacy, try this, from one of the most respected journals in politics:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/04/123000000000000
“In 2040, the Chinese economy will reach $123 trillion, or nearly three times the economic output of the entire globe in 2000. China’s per capita income will hit $85,000, more than double the forecast for the European Union, and also much higher than that of India and Japan.
“In other words, the average Chinese megacity dweller will be living twice as well as the average Frenchman when China goes from a poor country in 2000 to a superrich country in2040.
“Although it will not have overtaken the United States in per capita wealth, according to my forecasts, China’s share of global GDP — 40 percent — will dwarf that of the United States (14 percent) and the European Union (5 percent)30 years from now. This is what economic hegemony will look like.”
Even I don’t believe Chinese dominance will be achieved this quickly or dramatically. But it shows you the ballpark figures some experts are using.
Blimey, Vettel just beat his own time by seven-tenths. Even with rubbering in, that’s a great lap forward.
More than a second gap from the Red Bulls to everyone else. Qualifying simulation should be interesting. A second is a colossal amount of time.
101 The only country with a GDP per head that size, at the moment is Qatar.
I can only think the author has assumed that present growth rates for China, the US, and other big economies will continue ad infinitum.
Inevitably, as a country moves from being a poor country, to a middle income country, to a rich country, its rate of GDP growth slows. That’s happened with countries like South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, and I can’t think of any reason why it shouldn’t happen with China.
oh tim, this is just utter sad and weary bollocks, and you know it.
What is a “stabilised” Afghanistan? Does it have creches and 7-11s? What is a law-abiding North West frontier? It’s never been law abiding in its history. How is killing lots more Afghanis and maybe some Pakistanis going to suppress violent Islamism, rather than inflame it?
We’ve been in Afghanistan nine years now - NINE YEARS - and the country is no more stable than it was when we started. Arguably it is worse - this last month was the WORST for American casualties in the entire war.
Have you read no history of the Vietnam war? Do you not see the depressing and unavoidable parallels? I sometimes think you are a mouthy little twat with a thin veneer of intelligence that, actually, disguises a very mediocre brain, a mind incapable of admitting a mistake, when it is screamingly obvious to everyone else.
This is one of those times.
Afghabistan can, ‘we’ win, well depends what you mean by winning. The French were in Algeria for well over a hundred years, they accepted it as a military burden and developed a force prepared to live and fight there.
http://french-foreign-legion.com/french_foreign_legion_history.html
Idle curiosity - what do you see in F1 racing, Morris? It seems to me incredibly dull to watch - people going round and round and very occasionally changing position, like watching somewhat liquid paint dry and betting on which trickle will reach the floor first. Not trying to spoil the fun - just genuinely curious. Is it just the speed, or can you see as a regular fan exactly what’s happening - Vettel made a brilliant move on that corner, etc.?
The other spectator sport I don’t get is golf. I can well imagine enjoying playing, but watching someone hit a ball a long way from the tee that you can’t see at the same time as watching the stroke seems incredibly frustrating - the lack of spectator overview contrasts with football, cricket, baseball etc.
101. I can remember in the early 90’s how experts were predicting that Japan’s GDP would surpass America’s by 2020. For various reasons that didn’t happen and there’s no guarantee that China will do so either. It wouldn’t surprise me if it did but it equally wouldn’t surprise me if it didn’t! A lot can happen in 30 years, economic trends can change.
107, hehe, we share a dislike of golf.
I like the combination of driving skill and the technical aspect of which car is better, how they perform differently at different tracks. Overtaking is difficult because behind a car you have slipstream, but if you get closer then the air becomes effectively dirty, slowing the car before you can pass.
One thing I loved which is largely absent now was the strategy of pitstops, refuelling and tyre changes, but that strategic aspect is almost entirely absent right now (excepting Canada).
On F1: Vettel’s wing appears to be damaged…
107 I’d agree. For me, watching either sport is like having to live in Budleigh Salterton.
To move the conversations sideways a bit, I’m a little irritated about Huntly suing the prison service for being attacked. I’d be calmer if it was declared that he has the right to sue as he should be protected from injury but… any damages should go to his victims families.
That way justice will be seen to be done but Huntley wouldn’t benefit.
101. Very interesting but it looks like it’s making a classic error of confusing projection with prediction. China simply can’t continue to grow for the next 30 years (or more) at 8%-10% pa: such rates become harder to sustain the closer a country gets to the average GDP per capita of those at the top. They can’t copy existing techniques then.
There is another problem with those projections and that’s resource availability. Even on current usage, there’d be severe pressure on oil and gas supplies by 2040. With a China and India consuming at first-world levels, they’d be nigh-on exhasted and hugely expensive. That issue will become increasingly important in the next few decades.
Finally, China’s got richer by running huge surpluses. Already that’s causing significant imbalances in the world economy and ones that are ultimately unsustainable at present levels, never mind increased ones. China’s currency has to become freely floating and convertible which will act as a bit of a brake on growth as the currency appreciates, though it won’t be as big a factor as the other two.
While the coalition document did mention both India and China for increased focus within foreign policy, it’s notable that India’s been first on the list. By the mid-21st century, the India/China relationship could take on the importance of that of Germany/France in the late 19th or the USA and USSR in the 20th. It’s not necessary yet to pick sides but indicating an inclination’s no bad thing.
105 - Tell us what you think would happen if NATO pull out immediately.
108 It was a bit before my time, but plenty of (non-Communist) economists in the Fifties and Sixties, predicted that by the Eighties the Soviet Union would have become an economic, as well as a military superpower.
On the face of it, Soviet growth rates looked impressive for about 20 years or so. We now know the figures were partly fabricated, but there was undoubtedly a sharp improvement in Soviet living standards during this period, before it all petered out in the Seventies.
The Soviet Union, closer, with more manpower, and presumably rather ruthless, failed in Afghanistan. Deduce.
coldstone @106:
Gordon has already covered the Afghan deployment with that one….
Src.: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?183644-Tonga-to-send-soldiers-in-astan
106. Rather a telling example. The French held on to Algeria at vast cost to themselves, their reputation, their moral self esteem - and then they got their arses spanked anyway, and they quit, presaging the end of the French empire.
Not entirely encouraging for the West in AFPAK.
110. The worst sport to watch live is rallying: a blur of muddy metal followed by clouds of dust / showers of gravel, and no idea who’s doing what, where or when.
Golf is made for TV but extremely poor to watch live - you do get close to the players but apart from sitting behind a par-3, really can’t see a whole hole. The top events are also absurdly expensive.
107 - Formula One and golf are similar in that if you watch the first and last five minutes, you can skip the middle.
Actually, with golf you can skip the first five minutes.
108
Extrapolation is a dangerous game, to say we are here now, and if we continue like this we’ll be there in 50 years is just absurd.
Gas lighting, if you were to graph the growth of gas lighting from the mid-19th century you could be quite confident that everyone in the UK would be on gas lighting by the middle of the 20th century, then….
The world’s first public electricity supply was provided in late 1881, when the streets of the Surrey town of Godalming in the UK were lit with electric light. This system was powered from a water wheel on the River Wey, which drove a Siemens alternator that supplied a number of arc lamps within the town. This supply scheme also provided electricity to a number of shops and premises.
Whose on Gas lighting now?
#55 jack W
Accepted, but the Union of the Crowns is when the Northern Lot ceased to be a separate identity.
They’ve b!tched about it ever since (1715 and 1745 being only the best-known dates)
Ugh, lots of traffic stops Vettel putting in a representative lap.
114. The Soviets in the post-war period were playing catch-up, on new and purpose built infrastructure. Even under communism, that should have (and did) produce impressive growth rates. A measure of how far the USSR had fallen behind is grain production: the Soviet output did not surpass that of imperial Russia in 1913 until 1953. Four decades of major war, civil war, famine, collectivisation, purges and then total war negated technological development. Once they had a clear run, it was pretty obvious that there was a lot of ground to make up and that it could be done quickly.
As to TOS’s comment about the relative output of Japan/USA, for Japan to have overtaken the USA’s GDP, it would have needed a per capita income DOUBLE that of America. For China to do it, it will need a per capita income ONE FIFTH that of the States. Huge difference.
Morning all
Another interesting and thought-provoking piece from David H. for which many thanks. I remain concerned that the next serious global crisis isn’t going to be in Korea or the Middle East but on the Indian Sub-Continent.
I remain concerned about Pakistan which as my father told me the other day is like Prussia - not a country with an army but an army with a country. That’s a tad harsh and not terribly original but the ongoing instability must cause concern.
Curiously, one of my usually non-political colleagues piped up on Thursday and got really annoyed about Turkey joining the EU - her concerns seemed to be about a “flood” of immigrants and a “wave” (it’s always hydrological, isn’t it ?) of cheap labour just when we were coming out of recession and suffering high unemployment.
I hadn’t really given Turkish membership of the EU much thought to be honest though in terms of population it would be a major player.
On the touchpaper of immigration, it was interesting to read in the strongly pro-Tory City AM how Vince Cable had apparently “derailed” Cameron’s visit to India yet their analysis piece backed Cable’s position.
108, 112. I agree that this prediction of a $123 trillion Chinese economy is probably deluded, I am merely citing it as an example of how some experts are thinking: of what is now seriously considered possible.
But even if we simply halve the estimates of growth and GDP per capita in that article, China is still easily the biggest power on earth, and the biggest power ever seen.
The difference between China now and the Soviet Union then is of course capitalism. As any modern visitor to China will confirm, China is ruthlessly capitalist - more capitalist than America today. It is akin to Britain in the 19th century, or America in the 1920s - (but with less crime).
The combination of rapid industrialisation and a massive population like that of China means China WILL inevitably overtake America in our lifetimes, barring something very strange happening; the rise of China to dominance is, ironically, as predictable as the rise of the USA was in the 1900s.
The only question is how dominant China will be. I do agree that the Foreign Policy author over-eggs his prognostic chop suey.
Ugh. That makes predicting pole winner damned difficult, because we know Webber’s proper pace with low fuel but not Vettel’s. Argh!
124 Fortunately, Pakistan doesn’t have Prussia’s military record.
F1 is one of those sports which the more you study it, the more you get out. Aside from the sometimes fleeting moments of high drama, (crashes and overtakes), the race progreses and evolves over the entire weekend.
In a way a bit like test cricket. High moments of drama, but then a slowing building, evolving game which can sometimes lead to a certain conclusion well before the end.
In otherwords, sometimes boring, sometimes very exciting indeed.
I like F1 mainly because I like anything to do with cars and it is a sport where the outcome can be changed suddenly due to mechanical failure, driver error ( see Senna at Monaco 1988) or by the weather. Another favourite of mine that gets a bad press is NFL, I enjoy for the way that the two coaches try to outhink each other and you can try and anticipate the play yourself and be an armchair quarterback. Granted it’s slow paced but if you get a tight game that goes down to the last few seconds the slow pace means the tension is incredible especially if your team is involved! The one sport I just cannot watch is baseball, what is the freaking point of it?!!
A few days ago the Guardian published a short film that encapsulated SeanT’s comment about the brutal pointlessness of young men dying in the Afghan war. It’s harrowing. I don’t know how anyone, politicians included, can continue to justify fighting when the aims are so amorphous and costs so high. Real bravery would be to admit we cannot ‘win’ and pull out.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/30/afghanistan-sean-smith-frontline-report
125 Even then, I’d be surprised if China had a GDP per head of anything like $40,000 in 2040. That’s 50% ahead of where Taiwan and South Korea are now, and 33% ahead of where Japan is now.
My guess would be somewhere in the region of $20-25,000, which would still be an outstanding achievement. It would mean that over the course of 60 years, one fifth of the World’s population would have been taken out of poverty.
Over of complete filth from Finn there, Pakistan avoid the follow on
130: One thing which must be true is that the days of army vs army are dead and buried. We need to look beyond that in terms of what that means in tactics, firepower, manpower etc. To to that a few sacred cows will no doubt have to be killed.
Lets face it, afgan/pakistan is a mess. Either we try to sort it out (impossible) or let them sort it out with guns themselves and hope they ignore us.
Neither outcome is very good.
In a way what we’re trying to do is absurd. Going over there to kill some people to make other people like us.
Bleh. I can see some value, but there’s only a few pounds available. People should bet more on F1!
FFS Finn, he is feeding Gul long hops
Get him off
135 - Betting on F! is incompatible with team orders.
133 It’s probably more that we’re reverting to what was the norm, prior to the Napoleonic wars, and throughout most of the British Empire, in which armies are small professional forces, rather than massive forces.
#82,#83
Bliar became a Labour politician because, and ONLY because, of Cherie, who’s a gifted barrister (allegedly) and an unreformed working-class Trot of Catholic Irish decent with a keen eye for the main chance and the money.
Think ‘trailer-trash’ (with brains) or ‘pikey’and look at the determinedly activist Communist her father was/is to get some idea of what she thinks of ‘The Establishment’ and ‘Old Money’.
Bliar is a decent bloke who must have been the basis for ‘Tim Nice-but-dim’ in the comedy sketches. Cherie is just a scheming *****, determined to destroy everything that can be described as ‘tradition’ and Tony was her mouthpiece and puppet.
Think of her as being behind most of his actions and you get an understanding that ‘destroying the system’ lay behind much of her motives.
Nobody, but nobody can have enacted Devolution as it has been so far and not seen that the destruction of the UK as a single entity was the inevitable conclusion.
There WERE alternatives available - ditto what he did to the HoL, which now leaves HHMQE2 dangerously exposed instead of being merely the summit of a pyramid.
I’m genuinely astonished at how many people on here post about Bliar this and Bliar that, and miss the bleedin’ obvious - it was *CHERIE* this and *CHERIE* that - Bliar was just doing what she told him to do.
‘Behind every great man etc etc’……..
Probably not so with McDoom, though - Sarah was just a convenience to him when his moods got too violent she could calm him down.
Interesting political program on Radio 4. Someone has just said they spoke to a pollster who assures him that as things stand AV has no chance whatever of getting through at the referendum. Does that mean the redrawing of boundaries etc go down with it?
137: Possibly, but then you just have to factor that into your thinking.
But Ferrari are just Tw***. Didn’t help I had to watch the last GP in Italian as well.
#133 slckbladder
Good post - I wonder what the Armed Forces would look like under that scenario?
Much less large, high-tech kit (subs, ships, planes, tanks) and many more armed soldiers with rapid transport (helicopters, APCs) and drones to provide local air cover and surveillance?
A very, very large force of trained reservists would be needed too, since you’d need to accept forces being deployed in a foreign State for years if not decades and that means you need enough trained people at home to cope with an emergency (or any sort)
138: One issue is of course modern armys are just hamstrung to a certain level by rules of conduct. A bit easier in the past when you could just kill anyone as you liked and not worry about it too much.
(Im of course not saying that you should be allowed to commit war crimes!)
143, Slackbladder, you big wet
133 slackbladder
It appears that Osborne is forcing Fox to face up to killing some of those cows by landing the MOD with the cost of Trident, which is no bad thing.
The really depressing thing about Afghanistan, is the UK ‘terror threat’ is almost entirely homegrown - disaffected, radicalised young British muslims, angered by our foreign policy. Trying to stop terror here by destroying the training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan is delusional. We should focus resources on intelligence and monitoring the jihadists in Leeds or London, and end the horror of young men losing their limbs in an unwinnable, aimless war over there.
130
130.A few days ago the Guardian published a short film that encapsulated SeanT’s comment about the brutal pointlessness of young men dying in the Afghan war.
Then find young men who don’t mind dying, there are plenty of ‘em.
Why is it, that some people can’t seem to accept that there are young men who enjoy fighting, who if you offered them a chance to go to Afghanistan would jump at it. Not everyone is like the people who visit this site.
I met an old school friend in Aden, who was then in 45 Commando, I asked him how he was getting on, (those of nervous disposition look away now) ‘F*cking brilliant the government is paying me to shoot w*gs, I’d f*cking well pay them to do that’
There are plenty like him out there.
Do you suffer excessive joint or back pain? Could this be due to an overly heavy wallet? Visit pb2 now for quick and easy pain relief!
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.com/2010/07/hungary-pre-qualifying.html
I agree with the statements that China and/or India will be the the leading world nations by the middle of this century, (probably by 2040), providing that the growth forecasts are maintained.
Another reason for their rise is the supine attitude of the EU: this entity has no foreign policy, no industrial or business policy, just a big and futile bureaucracy that ties this large portion of the world in knots. The attitude of its individual nations, are at the moment, just as weak.
The 2 BIG flies in the sunny ointment for the East is:
1) Russia: This country is going through a quiet revolution in business and a reorganisation of it’s industrial base. Still not a democracy and with a still divided political body.
Once the politics is finally organised satisfactorily, Russia can and will grow very quickly.
2) Militant Islam: Not a country but a political/religious force which will try to take advantage of the complacent western nations, including the USA, and run by organisations in small nations like Iran, Syria and Pakistan.
The aim to make a new Caliphate (embracing the West) is not just an idle dream but a well thought out plan/plans by these countries and organisations. And they are carrying it through.
Cameron may or may not be making foreign policy on the hoof, but in the long run will make no difference, as British power and influence wane still further.
125. Similar ‘experts’ were predicting Japan would be the dominant world economic power twenty-odd years ago (and as late as the 1960s, that the USSR would be). Naive extrapolation isn’t analysis.
146
I’m sure there are plenty like that, but that’s no justification for fighting wars. What about their families? What about those civilians they accidentally kill in battle? Shouldn’t every war we fight pass a test of absolute necessity regardless of whether some of our soldiers would enjoy it? I think SeanT’s original point was comparing the Afghan war with WWII - one is pointless, stupid and driven by imperialistic bravado, the other in defence of freedom, country and our way of life. There’s a difference.
Silvio Berlusconi in peril as old ally and 33 MPs desert him over scandals
• Italian premier puts brave face on defection
• Parliamentary majority ebbs away in new crisis
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/30/silvio-berlusconi-italy-gianfranco-fini
Thanks, Morris and other F1 fans - interesting and makes sense now you’ve explained.
I wonder if the Islamic faith will become outlawed/reviled in the West/UK as Catholicism/Judaism once were?
They’ve already created their own ghettos and either those are broken down (by banning immigration and having compulsory secular, integrated education) or there will be inter-religious conflict (’race riots’) in some inner-city areas.
Strauss out for a Duck!
153. Unless islam changes radically over the next twenty years or so, serious civil conflcit within several European countries looks very likely.
It is possible to win in Afghanistan..simple..just anhillate the entire population…but we dont do that anymore so it is almost impossible to “Win”..At the very best it will be called a score draw and the troops will come home…its the way its done these days..
156 - “but we dont do that anymore”
err, who’s ‘we’ ?
155: More likely the EU breaks up in some way or form. It seems ruddlerless and leaderless, with no clear movement in how it develops in the next 15-20 years. Already those paying (Germany) are getting fed up, and the money for the developing nations is running out.
146 I’ve encountered similar sentiments from soldiers who served in Northern Ireland. There are people who loved every moment of their service in both World Wars.
146 - coldstone is right about soldiering (at least in many cases) - every soldier I’ve talked to about it (and that’s quite a few) says they prefer being in action to hanging about on base training and polishing shoes: it’s what they joined up for and the danger is part of that. It’s the big difference from a conscript army.
That doesn’t mean that we should enter any old war for the hell of it, and I must say I increasingly share doubts about Afghanistan, but it’s misplaced to think that every soldier there is desperately longing to come home and work in an estate agency or that they would necessarily support pulling out.
152: Nick, one word of advice if you fancy knowing more about F1. Treat qualifying as just important as the race. Often it can be more exciting!!!
146. You don’t get it. I’m not a pacifist. I am proud of Britain’s military record, proud of our warrior spirit, and entirely unashamed of our history of totally beating up almost every other nation on earth, and creating the world’s greatest empire before teatime at Lords on the first day.
And I happily accept that this glorious record is based on Britain having a lot of men who are Up for it.
What I don’t like is seeing the lives of these brave young men/pugilistic hooligans, wasted in a POINTLESS AND UNWINNABLE AND INDEED PROBABLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE WAR.
That’s the difference. I am no peacenik.
BTW It doesn’t take a genius to work out that any prolonged war in Afghanistan is, almost by definition, unwinnable. The people there simply will not be colonised, and they see any invasion lasting more than a few weeks as colonisation.
Almost every single empire in Eurasia has come a cropper there. America will be no different (though I predict they will try and engineer some face-saving “stabilisation” as they did in Vietnam, before a shifty withdrawal).
As someone on here wisely said, America actually won the war in Afghanistan in 2002 (or whenever it was they routed the Taliban). At that point they should have left the country, showered the remaining warlords with bribes to stay peaceful, bought all their opium crops (and destroyed or diverted them) and threatened the Afghan tribes with carpet bombing if they ever got terroristic again.
The combination of threatened stick and lavish carrot would have been infinitely cheaper for us in the long run, in lives and cash, and surely more effective.
But we got distracted by Iraq, and no one thought this through, and we are where we are. The best choice now is a version of the above, - swift withdrawal/quarantine the country - though the chances of success are slimmer.
For our next war we should choose somewhere nice and easy for our bootboys to do their thing.
73. Eagles
“But when it came to the whole Megrahi appeal, the Scottish Legal System didn’t cover themselves in glory.
If he was palpably innocent as the some have suggested, why wasn’t his appeal allowed to go the full course?
In the eyes of the law, he is still Scotland’s biggest mass murderer.”
My take on this (which will doubtless get the SNATs frothing):
It’s all about SNAT insecurity.
In SNAT eyes everything Scottish is great (or at least better than English) and Scotland has been fortunate in the sterotypes the world views it through:
The clever Scottish banker
The wise Scottish doctor
The resourceful Scottish engineer
The brave Highland soldier
(Compare with Wales what got - miners, male voice choirs and druids)
Now the SNATs don’t have much use for the brave Highland soldier and the clever Scottish banker is now totally discredited. While the resourceful Scottish engineer is now seen only in reruns of Star Trek - the incompetant Scottish social worker would be a more accurate national sterotype.
So SNAT sensibilities have become a little sensitive since the ‘arc of prosperity’ glory days.
Then the Megrahi situation arises.
To a SNAT the really great thing about Scotland is the thing that is separate (and in their eyes therefore better) to that in England ie Scottish Law.
And the most important case ever in Scottish Law was Megrahi.
And the SNATs know that Scottish Law fcked up big.
If Megrahi goes to appeal the judgement will be overturned and Scottish Law ridiculed worldwide. An unbearable humilation for the SNATs who will no longer be able to think it superior to English law.
Therefore to the SNATs there must be no appeal.
And so the health issue is created and Megrahi is released ‘compasionately’.
Unfortunately for the SNATs Megrahi refuses to do the decent thing and die - with a side effect of discrediting another aspect of Scottish national pride, the wise Scottish doctor.
And the icing of the Megrahi release cake for the SNATs was that they knew it would annoy the US government, thereby showing what a big man Salmond was compared to the poodlism of Blair and Brown.
Of course acting the big man has consequences and this is the part the SNATs don’t like hence SD’s complaints about any criticism.
156 That was essentially the approach adopted by Genghis Khan; surrender, and live. Resist, and be exterminated.
157 SSC..Was that a serious question…
163 That’s about it.
Completely OT, but I’ve just seen Bunnco on the telly! Some tedious nimbies had appealed against a planning decision or something and his council will be lumbered with the costs.
133: slackbladder at 11:10 am
“One thing which must be true is that the days of army vs army are dead and buried.”
If you mean that conventional wars will not be fought in the future then you are talking total nonsense. If you mean that the UK should take the decision that it will never again participate in a conventional war and should re-shape its forces accordingly, then you have an argument that can be defended.
However, what would happen in those circumstances were the UK, or its vital interests, be threatened by a conventional force. We would have but one option, surrender.
Defence planning should look forward in terms of decades. Politicians tend to look forward in terms of tomorrow’s Daly Mail headlines or the next election at the latest. What conventional threats could the UK face in the coming thirty years? What additional threats could it face it had no means of defending against them?
runnymede, naive extrapolation isn’t analysis, but naively ignoring awkward facts isn’t analysis either.
There are two huge differences between China now and Japan and the Soviet Union then.
The Soviet Union was crippled by a literally ridiculous economic system - communism. And it was bled white by its desire to export its creed, through war and military spending.
China is capitalist, and ruthlessly so. It also has no desire to export its way of life by war or revolution. In fact in some ways it is oddly self-effacing (notice its embarrassment when it gets labelled the “biggest” - they tried to deny last week that China was the biggest user of energy on the planet).
http://tinyurl.com/2fv5xvm
As for Japan, the comparison is even more specious. Japan is tiny, demographically and geographically. It was never going to overtakle America and only Michael Crichton really thought it would, and he was a lying thriller writer.
China is vast in population and geography. And China also has a notably rich, powerful and influential Diaspora: Taiwan and Singapore are significant economic Chinese powers in their own right. Ethnic Chinese domninate the economies of Thailand, Cambodia, parts of Malaysia.
Go East, young men! And middle aged men, too!
165 – No not really, Mr Dodd – As Sean points out @164, wiping out entire populations ala Genghis Khan has not been standard practice for quite some time (which kinda was my point)Was it ever Britain’s MO?
One thing that isn’t mentioned about Afghanistan bus is pertinant to why it is an unwinnable war is THAT IT ISN’T A PROPER COUNTRY.
There is not such thing as an Afghani race, they’re a mixture of various racial groups - Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbecks, Hazaris etc.
At the moment the Afghan national army is dominated by the Tajiks and other northerners and so is regarded as an occupying army by the Pashtuns in the south.
I believe there was suggestions in the 1950s that the country should be partioned between Pakistan and the USSR.
163 - Thanks for that, very illuminating.
Perhaps SD or some of the Nats here would answer this. (I have asked this before, but got no answer)
If Thomas Hamilton hadn’t killed himself, and had been found guilty of the murder of all his victims at Dunblane, and he then 10 years later got cancer, and had 3 months to live.
Would the Scottish Justice Minister have released him on compassionate grounds?
164
People ask what you have to do to win, then raise moral objections when you tell ‘em.
150
I’m sure there are plenty like that, but that’s no justification for fighting wars. What about their families? What about those civilians they accidentally kill in battle?
Families, these guys don’t have families and if they did, they won’t weep for them. As for civilians, well they always get in the way don’t they.
There’s a scene in Apocalypse Now, where Captain Willard is surveying the wreckage left after a USO show, drunken GI’s have rushed the stage to get at a troop of Playboy Bunny girl’s.
‘Charlie he’s out there in the jungle he’s watching this and he’s laughing. Charlie don’t get no USO he’s dug into deep or moving too fast for that. Charlie’s idea of R&R is a little bit of rat meat mixed in with his cold rice. For Charlie there is only one way out of here, its death or victory’
If you want to win, fight like the enemy.
170 I didnt date it..it is not possible to actually “Win” a war these days..too many restrictions..but for a good purpose..it would be unacceptable to do the Khan thing..but this thought process must be in the pre attack planning..not after..War must be re-defined..maybe as extreme political policies carried out at the point of a gun..
163 another richard. Gordon Brown,Fred Goodwin and Tony Hayward are the flower of Scotland’s fine educational system.
Great thread. A few thoughts:
David Herdson, I completely agree with you that as the new world order emerges with these rising power, two power blocs will inevitably form. There might be varying degrees on how well those power blocs deal with each other, but I think its almost certain they will to some extent. I’m also fairly confident these will form around China, as it will be the biggest power, and a US-led West.
I do not share SeanT’s view of the power the EU will have, mainly because I think our attitudes on domestic and economic policy are too different for country leaderships to be willing to completely unify - although this may change if the most difficult powers (i.e. Britain) drop out.
What will be interesting is players like Brazil and India. Historically the natural temptation for them is to think of themselves as part of the globally oppressed due to the history of colonialism etc, but as China comes more to the fore, and their own societies become richer, I think the starker division will be the difference in character from governments formed by an autocracy, and ones elected from their people - particularly when that people is increasingly liberal and middle class. This question will likely hang heavily on how assertive the People’s Republic is abroad once its period of “peaceful rise” is over. I think they’re highly likely to be very assertive, due to their proud history, the lack of obstacles to do more what they want when they have such power, and the way their policy towards places like Taiwan suggests a “wait until later” approach.
Sean Fear, you mention how the USSR had fantastic growth early on and then poor growth later. I feel this ties into the conversation the other night. When you have aggressive, centrally planned efforts, you can really have a demand-led economy which improves short term performance. But do it for too long and you crowd out private sector investment supply, and choke off future growth. It thus makes sense to do something short term (if you can afford to) to prevent a terrible recession, but you have to be very careful to get the balance right. Ultimately nobody knows for sure whether the right time to stop is now, or in a year’s time.
Weathercock, you mention militant Islam as force going forward. I actually think this is fading as a global force. It has been sustained somewhat by Western actions in the Muslim world - traditionally by Israel but also had a massive boost from Iraq, and a smaller one in Afghanistan. However, I think most (relatively) moderate Muslims are increasingly put off by this, and I think a (relatively) more liberal Islam will form from communities in the West and emerging powers in Turkey finding that actually getting rich and having a nice family is more attractive than being angry and violent.
Finally, I just watched the coalition documentary and a couple of things struck me. The first is how bitter and betrayed many of the figures around Brown seemed at the Lib Dems choices - Brown, Adonis, Balls - and how it revealed a misunderstanding of the Liberal mentality that doesn’t think of themselves as a smaller version of Labour. They also didn’t seem to cope with not being in the position of negotiating power which bodes poorly for them in opposition. Mandelson however seemed to be apart from this, and his talent for seeing new realities and understanding other political actors will surely help Labour going forward.
Secondly, the actions of the people forming the coalition - Cameron, Clegg, Laws, Hague, O’Donnell, and most of the senior Tories and Lib Dems - made me incredibly proud to be British. The actions of politicians in the US, mostly Republicans but a lot of Democrats also, makes me want to bang my head against a brick wall often when they are doing things so obviously for partisan reasons, even while its clear they can’t really believe. Our lot, and particularly the Lib Dems, really did put the nation first even when it could cost them politically for doing so. They also acted in a very reasonable, non-partisan way to put together a plan for what will be a very difficult five years. Hopefully when the Brown-Balls clique (and others like Harman) is got rid of, Labour will be more reasonable under a Miliband (as I suspect they will be).
172. TSE.
The answer, based on the historical precedent of Lockerbie, is, if Wee Eck thought that releasing him would generate could press for the SNP in Scotland, then yes.
SeanT
I agree with your previous general analysis that you don’t need to be a democracy to be a significant financial and economic success. But I do feel that your chracterisation of what it is to be capitalist and free market are somewhat off.
China has huge state intervention, be it controlling its currency to its infrastructure projects. Also the Asain Tigers were also huge huge government interventionalist.
South Korea got rich not because it was market based but because it used its government to control and shape the market.
Following the triumph of David Cameron’s “Get me a headline and I’ll say the first thing that comes into my head to please my hosts” tour, two extra dates have been added.
Cameron attacks child abuse in the Catholic Church.
Location - Ibrox
Cameron attacks Orange Order sectarianism.
Location - Parkhead.
While we’re on Afghanistan, one thing to throw into the mix is the American military culture.
The States has very little experience of winning the kind of war it was intending to fight there: a war of occupation. In the past, it’s always fought to win and then get out (or in the case of the War of Independence, to win and get someone else out). Its wars of occuption - going west - were close to wars of annihilation.
Secondly, it’s not fought many limited wars. This ties in with the first point (and also provides the serious answer to Richard’s about causing civilian casualties). When Britain acquired an empire, it held on to it for so long not because it was brutal and ruthless but for the opposite reason: the conquest came at a low cost to the native population and local tribal leaders and princes who cooperated not only avoided deposition or worse but received preferment and backing.
The States, by contrast, even when not fighting total wars such as the Civil War, WWI and WWII, has been notably less worried about civilian casualties - hence the napalming in Vietnam. That creates resentment and resistance. Not a problem if you plan on going home after you win; big problem if you plan on staying.
180. I think the current two wars has dramatically changed US thinking in this regard.
179
tim,
Lets look back to the last time David Miliband went to India, and your party might make him leader.. Heaven forbid.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/andrewpierce/4316661/David-Miliband-is-an-embarrassment-strutting-the-world-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/milibands-trip-to-india-a-disaster-after-kashmir-gaffe-1418914.htmlstage.html
178. Well there’s capitalism and there is capitalism, isn’t there?
What China is doing has been called “state-directed capitalism” and I reckon that’s a fair description. Strategic goals are set by the government (and lacking some of the democratic checks we have, they can be more ruthless in these choices). Also certain companies are nurtured and favoured by the state, and there is some protectionism, and definite manipulation of the currency.
So its not a free market in the purest sense. But what capitalist country ever was? France is known for choosing national champions, and for grand infrastructural strategies. France is still capitalist.
Japan was notorious for protectionism: Japan was capitalist.
Almost every country in the west tries to manipulate the currency markets in their favour: they are still capitalist.
What makes them all capitalist? Surely it is the element of free enterprise - people are encouraged to start companies, employ workers at wages they decide, compete freely with other companies, and keep their profits, because to “get rich is glorious” as Deng Xiao Ping said.
By this standard China is definitely capitalist, more so maybe than some welfarist western European countries, which interfere more with wages, have stronger unions, etc.
Anyway the proof is in the Peking pudding. If you want to know whether China is capitalist - my advice is go there. As I have done several times.
Once you see it in the flesh, buzzing and humming with adverts and shops and consumers and neon and fervent and combative commerce in a way almost unimaginable in stolid old Europe, any doubts will be resolved.
182 - Your links don’t work but I presume you are referring to this statement.
“Resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms and allow Pakistani authorities to focus more effectively on tackling the threat on their western borders.”
Which is arguably correct, as Camerons statemnt is arguably correct.
It seems to me that Milband had matured significantly over the last couple of years, we should hope that Mr Cameron can embark on the same journey.
tim @179
Labour, of course, is an expert on dealing with foreigners - you bomb the shit out of them and then invade without UN sanction against all the rules of international law.
Pathetic Tim. If I was you I’d shut up about foreign policies.
SeanT
Ahh but just remember Sean, it was tractor stats and 5 year plans coupled with trade barriars and huge government subsidies that allowed south korea etc to do the job.
It should be pointed out as well though that when these companies had over come the massive barriers to entry that existsed and they could compete they were told to and lost the subsidies and barriers.
therefore subsidies are good for feldging young economies but F!ck up a country if its already rich (unless its an area that is new - like better planes)
20 - “Your real beef is that the SNP (note, not Scotland) are being fingered for having made a shockingly poor decision based on the flimsiest of medical evidence. Suck it up.”
Spot on AntiFrank
185 - I realise that you prefer Douglas Hurds approach to Foreign Policy, but presume you support the UN backed action in Afghanistan?
Socrates@178
You may be right about inevitable EU decline, but I hope and believe that you are wrong.
That said, I had an interesting three day journey across northern France - London-Paris-Rennes-Quimper - and back again - last week. And it really didn’t make a very good impression.
Britanny is lovely, but the whole place, indeed all northern France, felt…. *tired*.
Lots of sad looking “hi-tech” buildings that must have been funky in the 70s and 80s but are now ageing badly. Graffiti everywhere. Nasty slums on the outskirts of Paris. The TGVs are brilliant but they often arrive in stations that are half falling apart.
The villages were pretty but shuttered, somnolent and obviously depopulating. The food was too fussy - overanxious, museumy. There was just a general sense of draining energy, a dwindling, fin de siecle, we-don’t-care-any-more attitude.
The moules were nice.
Lots of these criticisms, in different ways, can be levelled at large parts of the EU, of course, from Scotland to Wales to east Germany to Sicily to most of the old Warsaw Pact. And we have just come through a nasty recession so its maybe understandable that Europe is possessed by a sense of tattiness.
Nonetheless, Europe needs to shape up. It is a stark contrast to the feeling you get in Asia.
But I think geopolitical Darwinism means that the EU will, eventually, get its act together. It shall unite or die.
OK now I’m off to buy me some mango. Sawadee.
187. The formula is simple (well, it has to be really)
SNP = Scotland = Brilliant
Any criticism of the SNP is a criticism of all things Scottish, and since all things Scottish are Brilliant any criticism is foolish and misguided…
Using the formula you can predict almost any post by a Nit.
188 – tim, I think Mike’s point is that you, as Labour mouth piece du jour, are in no position to lecture anybody on the present Government’s Foreign Policy.
191 - One thing we’ve all learnt over the last fortnight, from Camerons pandering to his hosts and his remarkable lack of knowledge of foreign policy and British history, is that he needs to jump on fewer bandwagons, take some time to learn.
I think we can all agree on that.
This piece is spot on.
It was never likely that David Cameron’s comments on Pakistan would go unpunished and today we’ve seen the first formal rebuke, with the Pakistani intelligence agency cancelling a visit to London, “in reaction to the comments made by the British Prime Minister against Pakistan.” The political fallout isn’t as severe as it might have been — President Zadari is still due to meet Cameron next week - but the Foreign Office old guard are unsettled.
There was something extremely refreshing about Cameron’s criticism of Pakistan (and Israel), which was entirely accurate and justified. As Tariq Ali wrote in the Guardian, no one doubts that Pakistan has aided and abetted various Taliban factions since the war began nearly nine years ago. But you don’t have to be a Kissingerean realist to agree, as David Miliband put it today, that while it’s “easy to make a splash” in foreign policy, it’s much more difficult to make a difference.
For now, I’m more troubled by Cameron’s habit of telling his hosts exactly what they want to hear. Criticising Israel in Ankara, where the Turkish political class is still furious over the flotilla raid, or Pakistan in New Delhi, where hostility towards its neighbour has been growing for some time, takes no effort at all. It would have been more impressive if Cameron had challenged Turkey over its continued occupation of northern Cyprus or its discrimination against minority Kurdish. While in the case of India, there was no mention of the Kashmir question, the cause of much grievance in Pakistan. With the coalition’s foreign policy still in its evolutionary phase, this is one defect that Cameron should address.
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/07/pakistan-cameron-exactly-hear
tim @188
Ever deflecting refusing to acknowledge what Labour did - backed, to their shame, by many Tories.
You talk about lies - what about the lies that Labour had to tell to get backing for its defining policy?
Tim - im amazed that you haven’t decided to go on about gove having tory ministers attack his handling of the acccademies bill!
195 - We did that yesterday.
Dogs bark and the shambolic coalition caravan moves on.
192. Even Leftie Luvvies are impressed
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/andrew-grice/andrew-grice-camerons-words-have–fanned-the-flames–but-his-approach-to-foreign-relations-is-a-breath-of-fresh-air-2040038.html
196 Saying it over and over won’t make it so.
tim
No idea why the links don’t work, but if you google
david miliband india
you will find both stories as 4th 5th
plus a bonus at 6th..
The sixth is where the Dark Lord had to smooth ruffled feathers..
Cameron said what needed saying.
Might I suggest you listen to R4 at 8.30 this morning for independent opinion.
178. Socrates, I see you are repeating the canard that Israel and the creation of Israel was mainly or even only responsible, for the birth of Militant Islam.
Even before the birth of Israel the Arab nations of the Arab League were furthering their own policies - like supporting Nazi germany - with calling on all muslims to rise against their colonial masters, (see Mufti of Jerusalem). Islamic countries like Iran and Syria had to be invaded and occupied in 1941 to prevent Nazi and muslim induced uprisings. A similar plot was uncovered by the British in Iraq about the same time and put down.
It is true that after the Arab defeat in 1948 (5 Arab countries couldn’t defeat half a million Jews, of whom less than 60,000 were combatants), the power of the mullahs grew, but the rise of militant Islam has many fathers.
I also disagree that Militant Islam is on the wane. One only has to look at all the countries where they hold sway.
Lebanon - The Hisbollah control the government.
Iran
Syria
Yemen
Afghanistan
Pakistan - Where as Cameron says the country faces both ways.
Also has partial hold over:
Chechenia
Somalia
Some Palestinian areas
It is also making cowards of many countries in Europe including Britain, who are afraid to criticise Muslim excesses. Also ask our American PBers if Islam hasn’t made great strides strides in the USA in the last few years.
No my friend, Islam is certainly not going into reverse.
194 - On Iraq, I agree pretty much with what Burnahm said in yesterdays debate.
@192:
I think one has to feel sorry for tim. Fatally compromised at having nailed his colours to the Blairite mast, he now sees public opinion on foreign policy, within and without his own party, slipping away from him.
You are isolated, tim. Even your own party now thinks that everything you believe about Foreign Policy has failed catastrophically. That’s gotta hurt.
For all the plaudits that Cameron has earned for his laying down the law, one shouldn’t make tim’s mistake of believing that this was anything other than a carefully orchestrated scenario agreed with the FCO, who are no doubt relieved that the Blairite era of murderous poodlism has come to an end.
@198:
If tim were to believe that, even for a second, he’d have to kill himself.
Impotently repeating drivel in the vain hope that repetition equals truth appears to be tim’s sole remaining hope for being taken seriously by anyone.
Mike, saying “If I was you I’d shut up” isn’t what made you known as Our Genial Host. It’s always possible to respond to a criticism by saying “nyaah, your lot were worse, what about…” but on that basis nobody can ever talk about anything since we’ve all got things others can point to.
203 - I thought it stood for Old Goat Herder.
@197:
I know, right. David Cameron, applauded by left and right for his foreign tour. Even Roger’s impressed. Even SUNNY HUNDAL.
Huzah! Vettel wins pole by a bloody mile. Something like four-tenths faster than Webber.
So, the tip was right. My other predictions (not tips because of lack of liquidity) were mostly right. Hulkenberg and Petrov made Q3, Button did not [error on my part].
202.
Surely the evidence that repetition equals truth is “extensive, detailed and authoritative”?
@203:
I think he’s right, when it comes to tim. He’s an unreformed apologist for Blair’s disastrous poodlism and murderous interventionism. He’s now seen as a crank by both left and right, and really is in to position to be lecturing anyone else regarding foreign policy.
205 - My point precisely.
He should stop pandering to his hosts.
Lets not forget in the case of Turkey for instance that their is a secular and Kurdish opposition to Erdogans Islamism that Cameron was salivating over.
Anyway I’m out to see Toy Story 3, if Michael Goves sets fire to himself accidentally in the next three hours it will have to wait.
189 Despite the best efforts of their governments, and the EU bureaucracy, most European countries are formidable exporters; they mostly export far more per head than the US, China, or Japan. So, there’s no reason in principle why European countries shouldn’t prosper in the future.
Unlike you, I think that a decentralised Europe, in which most decisions are taken at national level, is far more likely to achieve that prosperity than a centralised European State would.
What Western European countries should be aiming to do in the medium terms is shrink the State by 10-15% of GDP.
I always thought that OGH stood for Overly Gloating Hectorer..
England wobbling - down to Colly and Morgan again
189, 210. I think we need delineate the idea of being a strong international power and being economically successful. You (somewhat) need the latter for the former but not the other way round. I generally see three paths for the EU:
(1) We make a real stab at being a centralised bloc with the current membership. This would mean a fair amount of international power, but I think the distraction of the policy disputes this would bring up would dilute any “unified voice” affect it might benefit from.
(2) The EU gives up on political unity and focuses on being a decentralised single market. Large parts of the union would become very wealthy, but we would not be very powerful on the world stage.
(3) Britain (and maybe Scandinavia and Ireland) leaves, and the rest of the EU comes together. This would probably mean a large amount of influence on the world stage, but as it would become increasingly dominated by a Latin capitalist-sceptic bloc it would not be very economically successful.
160. Stephen Ambrose in the book version of Band of Brothers mentions there is (to paraphrase) a “love of Comradeship”, “love of Spectacle”, and “love of destruction”.
Begun the pb2 post. Pre-race article will probably take a while, because I’m not sure whether I’ll be tipping the winner, and the other markets need more money pouring in.
78. runnymede July 31st, 2010 at 9:39 am
I quite agree and I think that apart from the Labour party who uses Pakistani Immigrants as “New voting fodder for Labour” nobody else wants them either. Whilst not wanting any immigration above a few thousand personally I have no problem with high skilled or wealthy people coming to live here as long as they have something to offer. I would not dream of wanting to migrate to a country where I could offer nothing, why do we let people in this country on that basis
What I do have a problem with is low skilled, unable to speak English, divisive (Burka/religous militants) ill educated and low potential individuals coming here. We have enough of those already including a huge number of white people in that catagory that need showing the light! 
I roaringly approve of Camerons comments on Pakistan as that country is a problem and despite Imran khan saying it is the west post 9/11 that has created the problem, with whom i disagree. It has to be remembered that Pakistan has had a lawless zone for decades, linked in with the kashmir stand off with India. One only has to look back to the late 1980s to realise the Pakistan/Afghan border region has long been a refuge for one mans freedom fighters or another mans terrorists.
215 Thanks MD, had a couple of quid tickler on Vettel. Short odds but the return is better than bank rate
217, cheers
Must say I was very nervous about it, because of the short odds.
I had a few pounds on Hulkenberg to make Q3 at 2.5 (if there’d been more I would’ve tipped that instead of Vettel), but didn’t back Petrov to make Q3 due to too short odds.
andyjay @216:
And this rather proves Cameron’s point:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7919814/Pakistan-cancels-visit-to-Britain-over-Cameron-terror-comments.h
“Pakistan cancels visit to Britain over Cameron terror comments”
Since if they were really serious about tackling terror through intelligence co-operation, they wouldn’t get all huffy at a bit of criticism.
Prior runs Morgan out by being a tw@t, that’s two idiot run outs featuring him this game.
Bring on the Kieswetter!!!!!
Megrahi dropped his appeal because of BLAIR@S prisoner transfer agreement. So just fk off you english w*nke c*nts
221.
That awful Scot Tony Blair has a lot to answer for.
GeoffH @219
Frankly if they are going to act like huffy teenagers why should we give them the time of day?
Apart from a few good cricketers that Pakistan has leant us - what exactly are they associated with apart from corner shops open on Christmas Day?
I’m being deliberately provocative as I genuinely have no idea why we haven’t put our foot down before.
I don’t think the same could be said of immigrants from any other country. Happy to be proved wrong.
I’d suggest that a common view of peeps here is that recent immigrants from Pakistan show an unattractive tendency to be unwilling to integrate/learn English, kidnap girls for forced marriages, allow or condone female circumcision, are convicted of honour killings, carry out domestic terrorism like 7/7 and insult returning soldiers, do poorly at school and have loads of kids they can’t support without state help - oh and fiddle votes.
No wonder they have an image problem. They need us a lot more than we need them diplomacy wise. I used to be pretty sympathetic but my views are becoming much more hawkish.
GeoffH July 31st, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Indeed - I agree very much with the foriegn policies the Government is now advocating. Something in the Labour years I found very hard to do.
Not just because Labour were in power but the whole slant of it was wrong and IMO not projecting our national interest. Foriegn Policy under Labour just seemed to involve spending money, giving it way or writing debt off whilst increasing British debt massively. I had forgotten actually how much previous Conservative administrations used to support business as part of foriegn policy as they did.
Incidently I am amazed Labour are still going on about Forgemasters - How many Teachers, Doctors, Nurses and medical equipment would have to be cut for Labours £80M loan to Forgemasters to go ahead. Labour still do not seem to know!
Plato @223:
I agree with you in every respect.
Not only do they exhibit all the unattractive characteristics you outline but, it seems, they also expect the NHS to perform ‘virginity’ ops to sate the demands of arranged marriages.
Also, I suspect, there is a big difference between Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigrants. The latter being responsible for most of our so-called Indian restaurants.
Plato July 31st, 2010 at 3:32 pm
Indeed - That country also seems to have the problem like Labour of always blaming other people for their problems as well.
It just really winds me up and I am glad Cameron has said what he has said. There is a huge part of the electorate that find the speacial treatment given out to immigrants (Under Labour) from that particular country not just insulting/offensive but very wrong as well.
I hope Ferrari and McLaren are more competitive come Spa. It’s a bugger trying to find value when Red Bull are miles faster than everyone else.
The original Peter @221:
I see the intellectual wing of the SNP has arrived.
But as we all know, except ToP it seems, dropping his appeal was absolutely nothing to do with the Prisoner Transfer Agreement (Blair’s or anybody else’s) but the necessary pre-condition for consideration of release on compassionate grounds.
andyjay July 31st, 2010 at 3:41 pm
Anybody who is seen to try and intergrate break away from the religous culture and social culture is attacked verbally or even physically. One such example is Baroness Warsi attacked by people because she disagrees with the vocal faction that think women she abide by what they say.
Another example is the outragious behaviour of that “Respect” woman on TV to the Tory MP who proposed the Burka banning on the daily politics recently. Though Andrew Neil cracked me as he defussed the row by saying that if he wore a veil/Burka the programs ratings would go up!!!
I thought that very funny and it was a great piece of self-depreciatting humour!!! 
In this country we are free to express our views yet this tiny monirity of the population attack our values and expect us to cede ground to them. I say NO!
Whilst I strongly approve of David Cameron’s comments on Pakistan, I regret that it has given DMiliband lots of ‘air time’ just when the last hustings are taking place. He sounds more and more arrogant everytime I hear him.
Foreign policy was never going to be David Cameron’s strong point initially, as opposition leader’s don’t get the access that prime minister’s do. I do feel, however, that the media need to show some collective responsibility if a prime minister makes a ‘mistake’ abroad as the consequences could be extremely serious, as this may prove to be.
223 quite. Very refreshing to hear Cam lay in like this. Pakistan needs to get it’s house in order and has done for some time.
Doesn;t hurt us with an emerging economis powerhouse of a billion people either.
Suffering from shock after a winning tip? Calm yourself down by reading this article:
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.com/2010/07/hungary-pre-race.html
It was interesting to see the UK press gleefully pointing out that Cameron’s arrival in India prompted zero interest in India’s press until he made “that” speech when he was also hailed for his lack of pomp.
230 – Ann, fear not, if the ‘air-time’ D Miliband is presently receiving is anything like the comments in the Guardian – then the former FO has once again shot himself in both feet. Here’s one of the most recommended.
“Better one who speaks his mind to one who covers up torture, defends illegal wars of aggression and surrender to American neo cons.”
Here’s another;
“What is preferable, speaking the truth and risking causing offence or deceiving to try and cover up torture?
Hmmmmm
Tough one.
What a wonker Miliband is.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/29/david-miliband-loudmouth-cameron-pakistan
233. The press are smarting, they have all lost their inside contacts. Nick Robinson now is as much use as an inflatable dartboard. He has no one to feed him his lines, non of the press took the libs seriously enough to befriend them for quotes.
They have very little to say, so instead of passing first rate gossip as news and editorial, they now pass third rate gossip as such, and it shows.
223. Also they have massive over representation in criminal activity, jail, unemployment and poor educational attainment.
237. Well thats changed my mind then…..
237. @ Scott P
I didn’t know Tim was on holiday!
Scott P @237
Time for us to burn an effigy of Mohammed ?
237. I can’t imagine anything likely to rustle up more sympathy for Cameron, from the average Briton, than radical Pakistani Islamists burning him in effigy on the streets of Karachi.
It’s like getting the public approval of Joanna Lumley, the late Eric Morecambe and King Alfred the Great, but the other way round.
new thread
237. Actually, it appears from the picture that the effigy was in fact someone called David Camroon. I wonder what he did?
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/front_page.html
236,notme - same as US experience with Irish & Chinese circa 1860, Italians & Jews circa 1910, Puerto Ricans & Mexicans 1960, Somalis & Salvadoreans in 2010.
Also for UK re: Huguenots circa 1710, Irish 1860, Jews 1910, Jamaicans 1960, etc, etc.
Just News-Googling the words “China overtakes” produces some astonishing stats.
Which is the world’s biggest shipbuilder? Japan, or South Korea? America?
You guessed, its China. Their shipbuilding industry has just overtaken South Korea “five years ahead of schedule” (they have schedules for hegemony??) to become the world’s number 1.
http://tinyurl.com/27yuqog
Which is the world’s largest investor in Br@zil? This has got to be America, right? Wrong. It’s China:
http://tinyurl.com/24frdzr
In 2009 China was the 29th largest investor in Br@zil. Now it’s the biggest.
As we all know China overtook America to become the world’s largest energy user last month.
http://tinyurl.com/3xlul2l
Yawn. Less well known is that Beijing airport is now the world’s busiest (if you discount the US regional hub of Atl@nta), it overtook Heathrow last month:
Three months ago China overtook America to become the world’s biggest re@l est@te investment market:
http://tinyurl.com/3adcc6z
China has overtaken America to become the world’s biggest investor in green energy:
http://tinyurl.com/23dglh2
China has recently overtaken America to become the world’s biggest car market:
http://tinyurl.com/22jhnml
Two years ago China overtook America as the world’s biggest user of the internet:
http://tinyurl.com/5q8ka5
On and on and on. Relentless. Astonishing. And happening right now, not in 2040, or “towards the end of the century”.
BTW this comment has taken about 20 fecking minutes to get past Mike’s absurd sp@mguard.