POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

Richard, I like the 'dimmest man in the cabinet'. I can still remember that excruciating 'Quiet Man' speech.....

[Bruff]

What else can you conclude about a person who claimed on his CV to have studied at the University of Perugia, Italy, yet actually attended the Italian Universita per Stranieri in Perugia, for a year, when he left, without qualfications, or finishing his exams? Or a person who claimed on his CV to have been educated at Dunchurch College of Management, when actually he gained no qualifications there, attended only for a day or so at a time, to study a few courses, amounting to a month or so in total? And why? Well, Dunchurch College of Management is the staff college of Marconi, where one I Duncan Smith was employed at the time of his 'education' there.

I mean, seriously. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions?

Richard Broughton

[plaques]

I mean, seriously. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions?

He should be able to spot someone on the fiddle like lightening!

[Stanley]

Nice one P!
ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) may have lost a bit of momentum but are still taking territory. President Maliki of Iraq called a meeting of parliament to pass emergency laws but not enough MPs turned up to make it quorate. See this REPORT in the guardian which has a useful map.
It may be my devious mind but I think I detect some bias in reports coming out of the US. The Republicans are using the situation to attack Obama for taking the troops out too soon. A general, speaking for the US government presumably put it down to Maliki's dire performance as president and the way he has shut out the Sunnis. (So it's not the US fault!) Other commentators are being very wary of criticising the original incursions starting in 2003. Guess which camp I am in....
Only bright spot I can see is that the Kurds are holding the line and consolidating their aim of an independent Kurdistan. Good! I have always had a soft spot for the Kurds.

[Stanley]

I suppose the Honours List comes under the heading of politics. In that case we have some rare good news, Hilary Mantel has been made a Dame for her services to literature. Stephen Sutton, the lad who made the cancer appeal and then died has an MBE because he accepted before his death.

[Stanley]

See this LINK

Why can't people like Blair go away, read some history and keep their traps shut. Pathetic and completely wrong. Mind you, from the reaction to his website entry, there is general recognition of this.... You can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Later at 07:15. Some very good comment coming through from Arabic scholars and academics. A man from the LSE has just been speaking and confirmed my opinions (always reassuring!). One phrase struck me, after saying that Tony Blair's view is "Rubbish" he went on the describe the present trouble as, in the short term, the direct result of the Coalition destroying the Iraq army, police and government structure. Then add the damage done to the infrastructure and the number of civilians killed in 'collateral damage' and the result has been in his words that Bush and Blair "opened the gates of hell". Dramatic language but I believe he is right. Please take a moment to read what I wrote in 2005. I stand by it and Blair et al would do well to read it as well...

YOU CAN RUN BUT YOU CAN’T HIDE.

Politics is a fascinating spectator sport. It provides a constant stream of examples of the pitfalls and traps which await the unwary in real life. We are watching such an example now in UK politics and it is, at the same time, frustrating and instructive to witness.

It’s the resurgence of the massive disagreement about whether it was right to attack Iraq ‘riding pillion with the US’ as the Chatham House report put it in a statement issued today. [formerly The Royal Institute of International Affairs] They have given as their opinion that the incursion into Iraq undoubtedly made the UK more likely to be attacked by fanatics. I use the single word ‘fanatics’ because I fear it is far too easy to qualify any description of the suicide bombers using the adjective ‘Muslim’.

The big problem for the Blair government is that they have invested so much time and effort into burying criticism of their actions in backing the US. Faced with the proposition that actions in Iraq have made the world more dangerous and rendered us more likely to attack as allies of the US they are forced to attempt to refute it. If they don’t, they are tacitly admitting that forecasts that this would happen before the attack, and informed opinion that this is exactly what has happened, were right. Ergo, the incursion was wrong.

In the past few days the human shields have been rolled out, all of them singing from the same hymn sheet. The refrain is, and here’s a typical politician’s rhetorical trick, ‘it is wrong to put forward excuses for the bombers’. Seeking the truth is not making excuses. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary is the latest big gun to be wheeled out of the bunker and sang his chorus this dinnertime on R4. John Reid, the Minister of Defence even had the gall this morning on Today on R4 to claim the support of history in his assertion that because 9/11 and other bombings happened before the latest attack on Iraq it was obvious that any connection with that attack was wrong.

I’m afraid that once more it was Reid’s spurious arguments that pushed me over the edge. If he is going to use history he should read it first, it might save him from digging the hole they are in any deeper. The problem is of course that many people hearing him would believe him and say ‘well, that’s all right then’.

I would recommend that they go back slightly further and start by reading David Omissi’s article, ‘Baghdad and British Bombers’ published in the Guardian on January the 19th 1991. This was based on the research David had done on his book Air Power 1919-1938 in which he traced the history of the RAF in what was then Mesopotamia and the punitive bombing of the Kurds to force them to pay taxes. He also mentions the shelling of the tribesmen of the Euphrates when they rose in rebellion against British military rule in the summer of 1920, when the British army used gas shells - "with excellent moral effect" - in the fighting which followed.

This evidence blows a small hole in Dr Reid’s interpretation of ‘history’. It has evidently escaped his notice that there are tribal elders and younger people taught by them, in what is essentially an oral tradition, who have been bombed three times by the RAF in their lifetime. It seems to me that to assert that such experiences have no bearing on attitudes towards Britain is not only foolish but a gross distortion of the historical record. At the very least, the government is on very shaky ground if this is their only defence.

They are wriggling on a hook of logic that is entirely of their own making and just as all the efforts to discount criticism of the attack on Iraq have failed, this latest attempt to deflect blame will fail as well. They rely on a failure of memory on the part of the electorate and I’m afraid that in most cases this succeeds. It is the duty of those of us with slightly more retention to raise these matters even though we will be accused of acting as ‘excusers for the bombers’.

I hold no brief for George Galloway but do recognise that when a man speaks the truth he should be recognised and not vilified. In a recent speech he said that until the nations of the West renounced armed force as a tool of foreign policy they would continue to attract opposition and terrorist attacks. I can’t understand how anyone can argue that this isn’t the case. We aren’t talking here of armed force used in genuine defence against clear and present danger. We are talking about what we used to call ‘gunboat diplomacy’ and the concomitant damage it causes. It is generally agreed that 800 men, women and children are being killed in Iraq every month due to suicide bombings. This does not include ‘normal casualties’ caused by the activities of the security forces. These deaths are a direct result of the destruction of the Iraqi army, police and security forces by our troops because it opened the window to fanaticism.

In an article in the Guardian of February 19th 2003; ‘Blast from the Past’ by Matt Seaton, Simon Schama, when asked for his view on the proposed attack on Iraq as compared to WW2 refuted any comparison and ended his piece by saying; ‘As a consequence, if you were Bin Laden, you would be thrilled about the prospect of war: either there will be a great fat target of a western presence in Iraq for several years or there will be a broken and chaotic state: either way it will be a teddy bears' picnic for terrorism.’ Dr Reid and the rest of the Blair government should have been listening, at the very least they should note this and add it to their reading list. Here we have a historian applying the lessons of history and coming to a clear conclusion which has turned out to be exactly right.

To ignore the role of past actions in Iraq when seeking reasons for the recent terrible scenes in London is worse than simple ignorance, it is wilful distortion of the truth. This is of course not a complete answer to why young men with everything to live for were persuaded to take such violent action but it is a good place to start. What is even more important is the fact that until unpleasant facts are faced, until the truth not only of history but of recent acts is admitted, there is no chance of any successful strategy emerging in the fight against such acts because whatever action is taken will be based on ignorance and short term manipulation of the truth. This is not a sure foundation for policy.

SCG/18 July 2005

[Stanley]

Blair's statement all over the news and the best response he had was muted agreement that it wasn't all down to the 2003 incursion, the main body of commentators were very critical. Listening to him making a verbal statement I was struck by the fact that after disclaiming any responsibility he said "It's simple....". No Mr Blair, that's exactly where you always go wrong, it is anything but simple, the history of this conflict goes right back to Pope Urban II inn November 1095 and if you think that history doesn't matter look at the howls of outrage when Bush called the incursion a 'crusade'. He was right of course if you accept the fact that the First Crusade was in fact a mass invasion of sovereign Islamic territories by Western invaders driven by religious, economic and political reasons bolstered by the belief that what they were doing was 'right'. Pope Urban granted remission of sins and a dispensation limiting time in Purgatory for previous sin and any committed in the course of the 'Crusade'. In other words, God and justice was on their side. I wish Blair would stop trying to massage his 'legacy'. As one historian said yesterday, he is the worst source for any meaningful or unbiased comment, he must leave his 'legacy' to history. (Then there's Chilton... Does anyone think revelation of the report gets any nearer?)
See this LINK for the outburst attacking Cameron from Gove's attack dog, his former adviser, Dominic Cummings. Regardless of whether Cummings is right or not, this is poisonous politics and a good indicator of the problems the Tories are facing at the moment.
In his Back Bench Diaries Richard Crossman repeatedly says that politicians are most dangerous when they see the prospect of losing their power. Perhaps what was true in the 1950s is applicable today.
See this LINK for a particularly savage attack on Blair in the Daily Mail. I suppose you couldn't expect anything else from one of the leading Tory organs but this is well based. Some terrible pictures of the alleged massacre at Tikrit....

[Stanley]

I was cheered by the fact that one commentator I heard yesterday on the ISIS uprising in Iraq referred his listeners to the 7th century when there was a dispute in the Islam world about who should succeed the Prophet on his death in 632CE. The upshot was deadly rivalry between the Sunni and the Shia which is still alive and well today. Remember Blair saying it was simple? History has to be understood when looking at what is happening there now. Another commentator this morning averred that she could see no other outcome than three separate kingdoms, Kurds, Sunni and Shia, almost exactly what was there in Mesopotamia before we reorganised the country 'for their own good' in the inter war years. She said that in any decisions as to what could be done this should be the starting point. If anyone 'takes sides' they will only exacerbate the situation and to quite the man from the LSE yesterday, 'Open the gates of hell'. Yet we have people like Blair et al talking about air strikes and 'containing' the Sunni based forces which we have conveniently labelled ISIS. Just heard Hague declaiming that supporting the Iraq government was 'in our national interest'. So, the same prescription again.... How about the Iraqi national interest? They evidently don't see it the same way. Wake up and take a fresh look!
Slightly off piste but pertinent. My mate Daniel told me yesterday that he has a picture of his grandfather sat outside a tent in the desert labelled 'cleaning up Mespot in 1920'. He was in the Indian army in charge of about 2000 Rajput troops. In 1914 he and his men were transferred to the Western Front but were soon sent back to police the border between 'Mespot' and Afghanistan. (He said afterwards that he was grateful as this probably saved his life.) Daniel said that all his life he said that Afghanistan was best left alone, it was impossible to administrate or police. Alexander the Great found this out as well. (More history!)

[Stanley]

See THIS for news of criticism of DEFRA for taking their eye off the ball when they cut back on dredging rivers, particularly in Somerset. Good news for anyone who was affected by winter flooding caused by lack of maintenance of waterways. Calls for a commitment to maintain the waterways in preference to starting new schemes as funds have been cut too far to do both. Some splendid quotes on the Today programme and also one of Cameron saying 'money was no object'. He might have known that one was a hostage to fortune.... (It seemed like a good idea at the time....)

[Stanley]

See THIS for the grilling yesterday of the chief of the Passport Office. What struck me was the 'patsy questions' asked by a Tory member of the committee using the occasion to suggest that the economic miracle was the cause. What nobody admitted was that if you cut back on funding for essential services they deteriorate and at the same time impose costs on the whole of the real economy. Think of the wasted time and frustration, no value is placed on them. Illich once said that the major hidden cost of cars on the road was the total time lost by pedestrians waiting to cross the road. Not even the best cost/benefit analysis will reveal this but it is a real cost.
See THIS for an excellent article in the Guardian on the Iraq situation. I don't fully agree with everything Mr Ramadani says but then he will have more insight than I have and it maybe that I am doing exactly what I accused Blair of, over simplifying. (but nowhere near as badly as him!). I think his prediction of the 'three sector solution' is good, there is no doubt that it would take a long time to bed down and in the interim would be a very combative situation. At the moment the West would do well to find out what the Iraqis want instead of making snap long distance assessments and rattling their gunboats.
John Major speaking on Scottish independence on Today on R4. I warm to him as he gets older, he talks a lot of common sense and doesn't slavishly follow the party line.

[Bruff]

One interest snippet from the Passport Office saga, was the fact that 10 million British passport holders live and work abroad with the majority working or looking for work/studying. I knew many, many Brits lived etc abroad but I had no idea we provided other countries with that number of immigrants. The consulates that renewed these passorts have been closed and the process centralised to here. It was predicted last year that this would lead to a surge. So I'm not quite sure it's the 'economic miracle' that's led to the demand surge, but that's irrelevant as if you say anything enough times there's enough charlies who'll believe it.

Also illustrative is the furore over this issue because loads of folk might miss out on their holiday. Bin collections are another where folk get exercised over cuts to the service - we all use the bins, so we're 'all' bothered about it. Flooded villages make great TV and money's no object when you're knee-deep in effluent

Meanwhile, the disabled or ill or unemployed or all three, wait months for their benefit reassessments; those sanctioned over anything wait months for a decision; consequently, almost a million now regularly use food banks and the number of children turning up at A&E malnourished has quadrupled. But so many either don't bat an eyelid, or imply they deserve it, or parrot there ain't no money so what can we do. But when you might not get your bin emptied or your week in sun well..........

''I warm to him as he gets older.......''

Yes, somehow I can't quite imagine him whooping and hollering, cheering and back-slapping, essentially showing such unbridled joy at the announcement of huge, huge cuts to public spending with all the consequent implications for communities and individuals. I would have thought it a time for sober reflection myself.

But no, pure joy and pleasure was what we got from the Government benches at the end of the Chancellor's first budget this Parliament and I think it then I concluded my MP, no doubt Pendle's and all the rest were in all probability really quite poorly. No healthy, reasonable, call it what you will, person would behave like that would they?

Richard Broughton

[Pluggy]

rattling their gunboats.

I thought I was a devil for mixed metaphors...

[Thomo]

Whatever your views and opinions are about the middle East, and just who's fault it all is, and what should be done about it, one fact remains, it is a major problem, and will not soon be resolved. There are many like myself who have seen this coming for some time, yet are afraid to say what we think as we may be branded as racist or Islamophobic. To be quite honest I no longer care what the human rights brigade, here or in Europe think about me, what I do care about is this Country and its inhabitants. There are a good many people of the Islamic faith who must surely be concerned and afraid of the events in the middle East and Africa, such groups as Al Qaeda, Al Shabab, Boko Haram and many others are fast becoming a global pariah. The members of these radical organisations have no compassion for anyone including those of their own basic faiths. It needs to be made clear that anyone in this Country or anywhere else who harbours such murderous individuals will be considered equally guilty of crimes against humanity, and dealt with accordingly. What we or the Islamic people in this Country do not need is the return of hard line militants to our shores. They have made their beds and should remain in them!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Stanley]

Richard, splendid post, thanks, I agree with every word. Major was always described as 'grey'. Rather that then bigoted and volatile...
Pluggy, I thought it was pretty good myself! Aren't words lovely!
See THIS for a bleak but accurate article in the Guardian on a resumption of 'the medicine as before' in Iraq. This as we hear that Obama doesn't think he needs the approval of Congress for any resumption of bombing and the hawks, mainly Republican are calling for action. I heard a member of the Jordanian royal family last night arguing against any further use of force against ISIS and their allies saying that the only reasonable course was negotiation. He made the valid point that when we hear the words of 'spokesmen' for ISIS we should be aware that we know nothing about what actual authority they have to speak. This applies to 'Taliban' statements in Afghanistan as well.
See THIS for a report on Labour plans to cut benefits to young unemployed who are deemed to be unskilled and in need of training. I wonder how much this will save? And at what cost. The present payments are hardly generous.....

[Stanley]

See THIS for a report about the spoof owl tweet after the Labour Party's account was hacked. Funny thing is that it is incredibly popular and has definitely done the party no harm. Perhaps there is a message in here somewhere....
The other thing that caught my attention was the report that President Obama is considering the use of 'precisely targeted actions' in Iraq to support the discredited Maliki regime. Now where have we heard this one before.... Do they never learn?

[Stanley]

I heard Cressida Dick (remember the poor innocent bloke who got 5 bullets in the head on her watch?) informing us gravely that we shall be suffering from the consequences of returning jihadists for many years to come. Quite! Why can't politicians realise that this applies to all their policies? Exactly the same applies to the consequences of growing inequality as a consequence of austerity measures bearing down on the public. Remember, there is even more to come and despite 'economic improvements' disposable income is still falling when inflation is taken into account, this on top of welfare cuts, even people in work are feeling the pinch.
Growing pessimism in Baghdad about the Iraqi Army's abilities and commitment compared to the insurgent forces. They look to the US for help but may be disappointed. Some quite astonishing reports emerge about the lack of attention to Iraqi intelligence gathering by the US. It appears that 'mission accomplished' is still their view. Some very interesting protests from returned veterans who are angry because they are seeing the cities and areas they spent so much blood on being taken over by the insurgents. They are asking 'What good did we do?' A good question and one that will play an increasingly important role in any future decisions about intervention abroad.
More attacks on Milliband. See THIS for Blunkett's back-handed 'support' of his leader as he (Blunkett) announcing his resignation at the next election. Similar messages are coming from other sources. Neither he nor Clegg can be very comfortable.

[Stanley]

Looking at the latest news from Iraq I get the impression that earlier speculation about them could be correct, they appear to have a very clear plan. I understood that one of their aims was the reintroduction of the Caliphate, see this LINK for the Wikipedia article on the Caliphate. The news today is that ISIS now controls all the western boundaries of Iraq so in effect, as far as they are concerned their occupation zone is now much of Syria and Iraq. The news also reports that the Iraq army groups holding the last border crossings did not resist but fled in the face of the insurgent forces.
This is a very dangerous situation and two things strike me. The lack of any regard for what the Iraqis want and the concentration on consequences for the West caused by these developments. The official government in Baghdad seems to be paralysed. If the insurgents carry on expanding like this there would appear to be consequences for Iran and Afghanistan. One by-product in the US and the UK is increasing derision when 'it wasn't our fault Guv' is wheeled out in defence of a disastrous foreign policy. 'Mission accomplished' was perhaps slightly premature....!
One thing that puzzles me, who is financing them?

[Tizer]

One thing that puzzles me, who is financing them?

That's what I've been wondering too, but I haven't heard anything about it on the news. An article in Die Welte:
http://www.dw.de/who-finances-isis/a-17720149
suggests ISIS has about $2 billion and that around £420 million came from looting the central bank in Mosul. Other banks could have been looted too, and there is a lot of extortion going on in the ISIS-controlled areas. Also they have control of oil in parts of Syria and are selling it (who to?). Some say Saudi Arabia are funding ISIS but they, and the US, deny it. People forget that terrorists using business to fund their activities is not new - Osama Bin Laden had a big company trading in honey worldwide (yes, honey!). And once you've got money, you can always make more money.

We're heading for fiction becoming fact. Remember Blofeld stroking his cat? "Hello Mr Bond....".

[Thomo]

It is possible that some of the money is coming from Saudi, and just as possible from some of the charity shops in UK!!!

[Tizer]

There's an article in The Times that suggests there is money from Saudi but it's private money from wealthy individuals. Charity shops in the UK aren't likely to account for much because the sums ISIS are receiving are very large. There's more than enough out there for them locally.

[plaques]

Not counting the lives that have been lost and all those maimed and injured as part of the British forces in Iraq the financial cost to the UK is estimated by Wiki at around £4.5 billion.
"Ref:U.K. war costs[edit]
As of March 2006, approximately £4.5 billion had been spent by the United Kingdom in Iraq. All of this money has come from a government fund called the "Special Reserve" which has a current allocation of £7.4 billion.[19][20]

As of 2013, UK Afghanistan war alone cost have been calculated as £37bn.[21] In June 2010, UK costs exceeded £20bn for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined.[22]"

No wonder the Chilcot inquiry has been kicked into the long grass. Tony Blair has a lot to answer for!

[Stanley]

Those figures sound very low to me..... Conflicting reports and estimates, have a look at this REUTER'S REPORT on the subject, they are into trillions not billions for the US alone.
Yes, you are right about Chilton, they are busy with the redaction felt tip.....!

[Stanley]

We were treated to a carefully worded apology from David Cameron yesterday after Coulson was found guilty. Cameron presented himself as a good guy who tried to give a man a second chance and was let down because he lied when asked the direct question 'was he involved in the phone hacking at the NOW'. This is a dangerous ploy. In effect Cameron is admitting that he by-passed proper procedure and appointed Coulson personally in defiance of warnings he had received. There are stringent rules about checking anyone who is to be appointed to a position as sensitive as personal advisor but these were ignored in favour of a cosy chat with the Pm and his Chief of Staff. He was almost certainly warned against doing this. We were certainly questioning this at the time on the site. Are we more savvy than Cameron and his advisers?
Question is, what was his motive beyond the fact that he desperately needed someone to interpret the grass roots, a subject on which Cameron is woefully limited? Could it have anything to do with a relationship with Rupert Murdoch? Was it to please Rebekah Brooks? There are too many unanswered questions here and at the very least, once more, Cameron's judgement is called into question.

[Stanley]

It appears that I am not the only one questioning Cameron's statement. He was attacked yesterday in the House and even the trial judge joined in (LINK).
I know I have a devious mind but consider this... There are some very sharp legal brains advising Cameron. This interjection muddies the waters and could well be the tipping factor in any decision by the CPS as to whether to order a retrial of Coulson et al on the charges which the original jury were unable to agree on. A retrial will be damaging for Cameron and the preferred path will be for the charges to be dropped. Suppose this was the intention behind the 'apology' in the first place? Or am being too clever and this never occurred to his advisers....

[Bruff]

I think you are being 'too clever by half' Stanley. His intervention post initial verdict was of course ill-advised and demonstrates his terrible lack of judgement or if we prefer, his inability to think about and understand, on any significant level, about the consequences of the statements and decisions he makes. He's simply not bright enough to be so Machiavellian.

This is not the first time he has been censured by a judge - he was previously called to task on his 'batting for Team Rebekah' tweet, an appallingly cavalier attitude to notions of fair justice. But then as a Bullingdon-boy, he has never really had to think about the consequences of his actions, the trashing of a restaurant say simply being 'quite the lark'.

This is the man who today will, on our behalf, attempt to impress on his European counterparts the need for a compromise solution to the Juncker question. Well we know, because the Polish Premier has basically said it and Frau Dr Merkel exasperatingly hints at it, he has very little, if any, chance. It would seem, to put it bluntly, his peers in Europe view him as ridiculous. And one thing I'd certainly rather my PM not be seen as is ridiculous. Remember though, this is the chap who when asked as Leader of the Opposition why he would like to be PM replied 'because I think I'd be rather good at it'. One perhaps could have hoped for a reply around notions of duty and service, principle, pragmatism, consensus and the like, but no. 'I think I'd be rather good at it......'

Richard Broughton