POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

" I only have history books written by the victors to go off. " You haven't read Omissi 'Air Power and Colonial Control' . It took me over ten years to find a copy and it cost me £126 for a 1st Edition hardback but well worth it. It was not noticed, just another boring text book, until Saddam invaded Kuwait when it was suddenly seen as being very pertinent. It details the measures taken by the RAF in the aftermath of WW1 when we 'reorganised' what was then the three kingdoms of Mesopotamia and correctly describes these as 'Imperial Violence'. Here's a LINK to some of the pertinent text. Definitely not a 'book written by victors'. Many commentators realised that it gave a roadmap for the possible consequences of the incursion into Iraq and current events in that troubled country bear out that view.
Meanwhile in Washington President Obama seems to be having second thoughts. I think this is because he is beginning to realise the scale of opposition in the US to 'moral actions'. Remember the hawks persuading the US to participate in the Balkans? Blair was Gung-ho and Ashdown backed him then and Clinton was persuaded. The vote in Parliament here wasn't the game changer but it was a straw in the wind. It will be interesting to see what France's attitude will be. One thing is certain, Assad knows he has at least a week to move his military assets into centres of population, next to schools and mosques, so that 'collateral damage' is assured and can be used as propaganda.
The other thing that is obvious is that the Middle East is more of a powder keg than ever. The less we meddle the better but of course there is the perennial question of energy. It may be that the success of fracking in the US has a greater influence on foreign policy than 'moral' considerations.... It wouldn't be the first time!
Meanwhile, In Europe, watch the German elections. They could be very influential in the ongoing monetary problems in the Euro Zone which have not gone away.
06:00. Interesting profile of John Kerry on R4 this morning if you're interested....

[hartley353]

An honourable Prime minster should be considering resignation after his recent defeat, but I doubt very much that he has any honour. The heir of Blair is probably looking only at a future of self enrichment. It must be considered a shame that decent men and women can have no ambition in politics because of its devisive reputation.

[Tizer]

The US information `proving' that Assad's people carried out the attack is said to be `unclassified' so I'm surprised that the full version is not being passed about more widely than just to selected US top brass...and not surprised that Putin is asking to see it too. Another confounding fact...there's been much debate about whether Assad or the rebels carried out the attack but very little said about the possibility that Assad has lost control of his military. There are at least four parties involved in the civil war...1)Assad, 2) the military, 3) the rebels, and 4) the troublemakers such as Al Qaeda. Working out who has done what must be a nightmare. In the short version of the US `information' (which has been distributed more widely) the only item that seems to come close to being real evidence is the `activity in areas where Assad's military is known to handle sarin gas'. But it's still a long way from convincing enough to start blasting them with Tomahawk missiles.

[Thomo]

The US are now saying that it was Sarin gas, and still do not seem to be able to understand that this can be delivered by the man in the street , it does however require an amount of dispersal, in Japan this would have been achieved by a passing train, in Syria, all it needed was a nearby explosion, and anyone could have done that!

[Whyperion]

Apparently in the Commons vote , two ministers (Justine Greening and Mark Simmons ) were in soundproof rooms when the division bell sounded, they were discussing Rwanda ( Greening I think is something in International Development ). http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... uss-rwanda . While Rwanda is probably important , and relevant ministers should discuss such things , there was comment that they should have voted with the Conservatives in favour of the proposal put forward to the commons. I think that all MPs should sign in ( swipe cards / bar codes / RFID cards ) when entering the commons , and their vote only ever counted IF they have been present to listen to the debate , in full as how can they otherwise make their minds up on bills such as this ?

[Tripps]

I wonder if their discussions touched on the subject of Uganda? I think we should be told.

[Stanley]

Funny how the reports of Ugandan Discussions often sink without trace. Remember the shock horror story recently that shocked David Cameron? Buried......
Heard Cecil Parkinson mentioned as a 'big beast' of politics yesterday. Funny but whenever I hear his name I think of Sarah Keays.... Some of us have long memories. I wonder if the perpetual injunction is still in place? (LINK)

[Tizer]

The US are now saying that it was Sarin gas, and still do not seem to be able to understand that this can be delivered by the man in the street , it does however require an amount of dispersal, in Japan this would have been achieved by a passing train, in Syria, all it needed was a nearby explosion, and anyone could have done that!

It might even have been Assad's people moving their stock of sarin to keep it out of the hands of the rebels and something went wrong - convoy attacked by rebels for example. Of course it could still be simply that Assad is lying and he deliberately used gas. But as some commentators have pointed out, why should he resort to gassing civilians and all the bad publicity when he already had the upper hand by using conventional weapons alone; there was no need for gas and no point in risking losing the few `friends' he has.

It was interesting to read in The Times (Saturday) the opinions of a number of UK ex top military men such as Lord Danatt etc. All except one were against us joining in with Obama's military intervention, principally because no-one has said what the next step would be after the missiles (tactics without strategy). Even the exception said he supported military action `only if sound evidence shows that it's Assad' and he's not yet convinced of that. It's interesting that many military people want no military action taken yet you still get politicians (and ex ones such as Blair and Michael Howard) wanting to `kick ass'.

[Bruff]

'...It's interesting that many military people want no military action taken...'

Not that surprising. I remember post-Falklands when Mrs Thatcher and much of the right, flipped over the the Archbishop of Canterbury's mentioning of 'the mourning on both sides of the conflict' at the Service of Remembrance. Baron Runcie was among many things, Robert Runcie MC, the MC being the Military Cross he earned as a tank commander in WW2, where he rescued one of his men under heavy fire and then the next day led his tank into a very exposed position and knocked out 3 anti-tank guns. I guess when you've been at the business end of the fighting your views on conflict and the sacrifices made by all parties might be rather different.

There's an old boy in his 90s who pops in my local pub every day. He was apparently badly affected by his experiences in WW2. Folk only recall him mentioning 'the war' once. In 1977, Liverpool played Bayern Munich in the European Cup final in Rome and he went as 'the last time I went to Rome it was in a tank'. A great-uncle of mine fought with Tito's partisans in Yugoslavia, part of the elite group who went into the Balkans under Churchill's instructions to 'find out who were killing the most Germans and join them'. His family never heard from him for 3 years. He never spoke about it, never married and lived with his mother all his life.

Richard Broughton

[Stanley]

Richard, you touch on an aspect of belligerence that worries me also. I look at things like COBRA and wonder how many of the people round the table have seen a dead body. Sometimes I even speculate on the fact that there is an element of wanting to try out the latest toys. I've never got nearer than the fringes of active service but saw the results and that was enough for me! Funnily enough the old Wehrmacht men who worked for us as Border Guards were equally anti-war. Good men, we should never have been fighting them.
Then there is the suspicion that the prospect of another Thatcherite 'Falkland Effect' isn't without its attractions. Underlying this is the vein of hypocrisy that seizes on something like the use of chemical weapons but ignores the deeper, and eventually far more damaging, effects of ethnic and religious divisions, many of them exacerbated by western actions.
Your mention of Tito and the partisans reminds me of an evening in a Bradford theatre listening to Peter Ustinov. He told a story about Tito attending a reunion dinner and at one point leaned over and noticed that one of his old comrades was doing violence to good table manners by spearing meat on his knife and waving it about. He leaned over, got the attention of the man and hissed "The knife!". The old fighter immediately shifted his grip on the knife so his thumb was on top of the blade and hissed back "Who?".
My late son in Law Harry had some uncles who had fought above the tree line in Macedonia and Greece and they migrated to Australia with the rest of the family. Unusually they talked to me about the war and I can report that they were serious men. However they all agreed that it was bad and should never have happened. It seems to me that the sharp end modifies belligerent tendencies.

[Tizer]

It puzzles me that there is such a big fuss made over whether it's right or wrong to intervene militarily in Syria and yet little has been said about Israel which has bombed Syria three times in the last year. I'm not supporting intervention but simply pointing out the inconsistency. I know the present business is claimed to be about the use of chemical weapons but Israel's action is surely `illegal' and didn't have the approval of the UN. How come Israel can do what it likes and others can't?

[hartley353]

It has long been said that Israel has its hand up the shirt of America, operating the mouth and thought strings.

[hartley353]

During the early 70's I met a man in Scotland who had flown with bomber command, he fulfilled his quota of missions, and went on to fly many more. This man went by the name of bomber, he lived in a caravan on the banks of the river Tay, and made a living cutting reeds, and guiding wildfowlers. He never spoke of the war and all that was known came from others. He enjoyed a beer and the company of the bar, but must have lived with great sadness and horror. When he passed in the late 80's there were many mourners Richards post brought back the memory.

[Tardis]

Did Obama blink? His red lines being redrawn? He does appear to be very good at vacillating and not making any kind of decision. Or did he realise that relying upon the French was perhaps not the best?

I would say that the case for intervention, even now, has not been shown to improve the horrific situation.

What struck me about the debate here was that Ed Miliband didn't say that he would, nor said that he wouldn't intervene and if you read Hansard for the debate, didn't debate either side of the argument. Just empty rhetoric, but accordng to today's papers his position has changed again

On top of which the book of the week on Radio 4 is "When Britain burnt down the Whitehouse". The beeb at it's best, you couldn't make it up

[Tardis]

Not read that one Stanley. Have read Lawrence though

[plaques]

Sometimes its wise just to look back. It only takes 6 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFCekeoSTwg

[Stanley]

Have a look at this LINK on the disparity between the living wage and the minimum wage. Amid all the controlled euphoria about the 'economic recovery' the penny seems to be dropping.

[Tardis]

Why did Ed lead on Syria at PMQ's, when he knew that he wouldn't have the last word

[Stanley]

I saw a report that Cameron had grabbed the fig leaf of Foreign Aid saying that the UK will still be making a contribution to Syria. This reminded me of the flak I got during the incursion into Iraq when I suggested that if, instead of spending money on destruction we gave it to support humanitarian aid in that country, eventually it would prove to be a more powerful and long lasting game changer. Think of the goodwill the West could build if instead of spending money on attacking the country it was poured into helping neighbouring countries to alleviate the enormous refugee crisis which is developing.
Private Eye had some very pertinent comments yesterday about comparisons between the current chemical attack and other humanitarian disasters. They also reminded us of the 5,000 deaths at Halabjah in Iraq under the leadership of Saddam Hussein and his henchman 'Chemical Ali'. Shortly after the Thatcher government renewed the export licence for materials to Iraq which could be used for chemical attack. Next week the Defence and Security Equipment International Exhibition takes place in Docklands. The organisers refused to give any information as to who would be attending (and by extension, where the arms would end up). It's a funny old world......
Nothing new about this of course. At the outbreak of WW1 all British shell fuses were made to a Krupps design and licensed from them. At the end of the war Krupps asked for the royalties on all fuses used in the conflict. They didn't get the full amount but I think £60,000 was paid out in recognition of the claim.

[hartley353]

I read some where in the past that Krupps were still selling specialist steels to this country through neutral intermediaries whilst our countries were at war.

[Tardis]

Appears Ed is suffering character assassination from both the red and blue factions of his party.

IDS may have been too over optomistic with his benefit reforms although the damning report does say that it is still on track. I wonder.

A new phrase too "fortress thinking", where only good news gets out and all whistle blowers and leakers are lept upon by the civil service.

Rumoured that IDS actually had his own department investigated by outsiders as he didn't believe that they were telling him the truth. Maybe we'll discover more when the Permanent Secretary is called before committee

[Whyperion]

I read some where in the past that Krupps were still selling specialist steels to this country through neutral intermediaries whilst our countries were at war.

In the middle of reading a book on Krupps , if its mentioned will let you know ( up to page 200 out of 1160)

[Bruff]

''...as he didn't believe that they were telling him the truth...''

But out of the other side of (presumably) his mouth, but certainly others', civil servants who do 'tell truth to power' are the enemies of progress.

It is the first role of a Whitehall civil servant at least, to 'tell truth to power' in the advice they give. Universal Credit is very much the Work and Pensions Secretary's 'baby', and he may not take kindly to being told it is basically unworkable or that the promises with respect to costs and implementation are unrealistic. The upshot is you get political briefing, whereby the advice is made to 'fit' with the desires on the Minister, rather than the evidence. To coin a phrase, rather than evidence-based policy one is given policy-based evidence.

We should perhaps not be surprised. For very and often many good reasons, some bright ideas a Government has may well be simply unworkable. If this is spun as the typical inertia of a resistent civil service (as the alternative - simply a not very bright idea - is simply unpaletable to a Minister(s) who as a class are generally lacking in humility, not to mention self-awareness), then we inevitably end up with the situation we have reported today. Who will speak the truth?

It is interesting that Mr Darling's intervention this morning noted his interest in a universal credit when he was at Work and Pensions, and the subsequent advice from officials that it was in large measure unworkable.

Richard Broughton

[Stanley]

Richard, I agree. I have always had a high opinion of the Civil Service. Of course they are an easy target for politicians and electors when their guidance or actions to support political policies are objected to and of course they cannot defend themselves. Yes, there will always be pockets of incompetence in large organisations but I was struck by the current attacks on them following so closely behind the NAO criticisms of the Universal Credit.
Much depends on the Minister's personal relations with his civil servants. A good roadmap of the pitfalls is to read the section of John Campbell's biography of Nye Bevan which deals with how Nye had to come to terms with how government actually works when he got into power in the War Coalition. He went in like a new broom, knew exactly what he wanted and was immediately frustrated by the civil servants who pointed out the flaws in his approach. He quickly realised the practicalities of dealing with them and changed his tactics and attitudes. The result was some of the best policies we have ever seen and after the war Churchill and the Civil Service praised him for the effective way he worked inside the structure and the efficient policies that ensued. Nye himself admitted he had been wrong and counted his senior mandarins as friends when the war ended.
Fantasy I know, but I have often wondered what would happen if we had say a year of government by Civil Servants rather than politicians....
The subject is being debated on Today as I write this and an interesting point has just been made by one commentator. He says that in days gone by the fall-back position when a policy failed was for the Minister to accept responsibility. Today the Minister stays in place and looks for scapegoats inside the CS. This breeds suspicion between the Minister and his advisers. Sounds logical to me....
I note that Putin's comment that the UK was a small island of no consequence has raised hackles. Problem is that he's not a long way off the truth....

I see that T Blair is poking his oar in again trying to justify the Iraq incursion. He should keep stum.

[Tizer]

Blair now says that whether or not military intervention was justified in Iraq had no effect on the Commons vote on Syria.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... vote-syria