Foreign policy

Today in Stupidity: Who Lost Syria?

Perhaps I should apologise to Leon Wieseltier? His recent column is not a patch on Jennifer Rubin’s latest screed which may be the most stupid and contemptible thing I’ve yet read today. Ms Rubin peers at Barack Obama’s Syrian policy and does not like what she sees: Not unlike the Green Revolution in 2009, the president nearly three years later is willing to allow an opportunity — to undermine Iran, support democracy, reassert U.S. leadership — slip away. Every now and then the president talks a good game on human rights, but his heart is never in it. In this case, even when coupled with an obvious and compelling national

Afghanistan overshadows Cameron’s America trip

Afghanistan, what now? After a week of death and retaliation in the country, it appears that a car bomb has been detonated on the runway at Camp Bastion — probably aimed at the visiting US Secretary of Defence, Leon Panetta. A spokesman has since said that ‘at no point was anyone on board Mr Panetta’s plane at risk,’ but it certainly highlights the dangers attached to his visit. What chance, now, that he will be successful in his goal of ‘easing tensions’? The incident cropped up very briefly in David Cameron and Barack Obama’s press conference just now. Asked for further information by Sky’s Joey Jones, the PM stressed that

Will Obama and Cameron discuss a faster pullout from Afghanistan?

The political theatre of David Cameron’s trip to America will have Downing Street drooling. The PM is, today, not only going to become the first world leader to fly aboard Air Force One with Barack Obama, but then they’re also going to take in a game of basketball together. It’s a carefully calibrated blend of statesmanship and down-to-earth-ship that will suit both men. Obama, because it might appeal, in some way, to conservative voters ahead of this year’s presidential election. Cameron, because, well… does Ed Miliband do this sort of thing? The theatre carries over into print too, with a joint article by Cameron and Obama in today’s Washington Post.

Hague’s ‘Cold War’ warning

William Hague has gazed into his Middle Eastern crystal ball and doesn’t like what he sees. In an interview in today’s Telegraph, he says of Iran: ‘It is a crisis coming down the tracks, because they are clearly continuing their nuclear weapons programme… If they obtain nuclear weapons capability, then I think other nations across the Middle East will want to develop nuclear weapons. And so, the most serious round of nuclear proliferation since nuclear weapons were invented would have begun with all the destabilising effects in the Middle East. And the threat of a new cold war in the Middle East without necessarily all the safety mechanisms… That would

Brits sceptical of Syria intervention

Britain’s response to Syria so far has been uncertain and cautious. A YouGov poll today suggests that the public is keen for this hands-off approach to continue. When presented several possible offences, the public responds with almost universal disapproval. A measly 9 per cent would support sending in British and allied troops to overthrow President al-Assad. Only 16 per cent would support providing arms to the rebels and 18 per cent support sending in troops to protect civilians. The only modicum of support is for the proposed no-fly zone. But, although a majority would agree with the zone, less than half believe it is necessary right now, with 26 per cent

A Syrian Srebrenica?

Every day things are getting worse in Syria. Today the Syrian regime started what looks like an all-out assault on the key city of Homs, reportedly killing at least 55 people. The attack took place as the UN Security Council prepares to vote on a draft resolution backing an Arab call for President Bashar al-Assad to give up power. The problem has been the lack of information about events on the ground. Though the Syrian government has failed to quell the uprising, it has succeeded in limiting access to information by the outside world. So a lot remains unknown, unreported or clouded in pro-regime propaganda. But speaking to people in

Let’s talk about Qatar

The rise of Qatar has been one of the most remarkable developments in the recent history of the Middle East. How this small, oil-rich Gulf state built Al Jazeera and parleyed the TV station’s influence into a diplomatic role across the region is an insufficiently explored issue. The list of the monarchy’s achievements is impressive, even putting aside how they secured the football World Cup for 2022. Qatari diplomats have mediated in Lebanon, helped rejuvenate the Arab League, led condemnation of Bashir al-Assad and joined the fight against Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi. In a way, Qatar has become one of the region’s lynchpins, second only to Saudi Arabia as the West’s

The hypocrisy of Cameron’s Saudi trip

A year ago, Tunisian strongman Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fled Tunisia for Saudi Arabia, thus ushering in the Salafi Spring. No doubt now bored out of his mind, this once stubbornly secular leader is said to have caught religion of the deranged Wahhabi variety propagated by his oil-rich hosts.   In turn, the Saudis are preparing to welcome Rachid Ghannouchi – the notoriously humble leader of the even more notoriously moderate Ennahda that now controls Tunisia’s parliament – on a state visit. This week Ghannouchi has been heaping praise on the Persian Gulf monarchies, doing us all the favour of revealing where his true sympathies lie when it comes

Douglas Murray

Hague’s misplaced optimism

William Hague has an article in the Times today arguing against what he refers to as the ‘pessimism’ of those who have expressed concerns about the direction of the ‘Arab Spring’. As somebody who cannot see the virtue of either optimism or pessimism as policy, and preferring facts to moods, I think the Foreign Secretary’s central points should be answered. Particularly as he chose so injudicious a day to publish his piece. Mr Hague’s argument against pessimism is that ‘such pessimism misses the extraordinary opportunities that popular demand for freedom and dignity bring’. Certainly the government of which Mr Hague is a part is not missing any opportunities. Today David Cameron is

The Burma trail

Foreign policy specialists have been confused about how to categorise the coalition. Is it neoconservative, given its backing for the Libyan rebels? No, says no less a figure than the Prime Minister. Is it realpolitical, given the PM’s willingness to make up with Russia and court China? Most No.10 officials would wince at such a description. So what is it? To answer the question, look no further than William Hague’s trip to Burma last week. Not only was it the first visit by a British foreign minister since 1955, but it was also the culmination of little known, high-level, behind-the-scenes outreach to Aung San Suu Kyi by No 10 and

Dire straits

The situation in the Strait of Hormuz continues to intensify, with Defence Secretary Philip Hammond showing that, like his predecessor, he is not shy of pushing back when he gets a shove. Today he warned Iran that any attempt to block the straits, a key shipping lane, would be ‘illegal and unsuccessful’, and would be countered militarily if necessary.     In truth, any conflict over the straits would be very costly for both sides. Iran is likely to have the capacity to strike, in a shock-and-awe attack, at US and British bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman. But this would be a dramatic escalation of events which would —

Who is the British foreign secretary?

Officially, of course, the answer to that question is William Hague – who has put in some decent work since assuming office, particularly during the Arab Spring. But, still, I ask it because, following the European Council, Nick Clegg seems to have usurped the Foreign Secretary’s role in a number of key areas. It was the Deputy Prime Minister who engaged the newly-elected Spanish leader, for example. It was also Clegg, not Hague, who was instrumental in bringing German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle to Britain on a ‘we still love you’ visit yesterday. And when it comes to phoning European leaders to press a UK position, it is the Deputy

Woolf tucks into perfidious Albion

Yesterday night’s news that a senior FCO official lobbied Oxford University on behalf of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi adds more ordure to the already fetid story of Britain’s role in Colonel Gaddafi’s rehabilitation. The Woolf Inquiry into Saif’s dealings with British universities and businesses found that, ‘It was made clear [to Oxford] … that the FCO would appreciate help in this case since Libya was opening up to the West again.’  Oxford resisted; but this episode has hardly covered Britain’s elites in glory: the civil service, BAE and august universities are all criticised in Woolf’s report. Murmurs of disquiet about the Labour Party’s relationship with the Gaddafi clan continue to sound in certain quarters

Iran lashes out

The pressure is piling up on Iran – from below, as people demand greater freedoms; from the region, where Iran is about to lose its one ally, Syria, to a popular revolt; and from the international community, which is tightening the economic sanctions in response to Tehran’s illegal nuclear programme. So Iran is hitting out the only way it knows how – through the use of state-sanctioned and illegal violence. They hope to divert attention from the country’s problems and internecine struggles, reheating old tropes about Britain as the ‘Little Satan’ and maintaining the decades-old decolonialisation rhetoric that all the problems of the region can be explained by outside interference.

GOP to World: Drop Dead

There are many good things in this week’s edition of the magazine and among them, happily, is a piece by Dan Drezner. It’s not online yet so why don’t you subscribe? £1 an issue for the first 12. Bargain! Anyway, Dan casts a weary gaze (there being no other kind of gaze when it comes to this sort of survey) over the Republican presidential pretenders’ foreign policy views. Here’s how he begins: During the 2008 US presidential election cycle, the respected journal Foreign Affairs invited the leading prsidential candidates from both parties to outline their views of world politics. All of them responded with essays that, one presumes, they at

Opening Europe

It is an article of British faith that further liberalisation of Europe’s market is a worthwhile goal. But few people realise the boost the UK economy would actually get from the finalisation of the EU’s internal market – especially implementation of the Services Directive, creating an integrated market for energy, modernising public procurement rules and liberalising the digital market. Implementation of the Services Directive alone would add 1.5 per cent of GDP to the EU as a whole in the next nine years, according to European Commission calculations. As the UK has one of the strongest services sectors, this will have direct benefits here. Taken together, progress in all these

No, Barack Obama is not the Second Coming of George McGovern

On the other hand, Rich Lowry – editor of National Review and therefore a man who should know better – offers this pithy analysis of American under Obama: [N]one of this should be surprising since the Democrats, despite the Clinton interlude, never stopped being a McGovernite party, and Obama is a McGovernite figure For the love of god, this is poppycock on stilts. I have no idea how, as Daniel Larison says, honouring an agreement signed by a Republican president that promised to withdraw American troops from Iraq can be construed as any kind of “McGovernite” policy. Indeed, for this to make any kind of sense I think you have

Amendment to EU referendum vote put down

Tonight, George Eustice, David Cameron’s former press secretary, and several other eurosceptic members of the 2010 intake have put down an amendment to the EU referendum motion that will be put on Monday. The amendment reads: “This House calls upon the government to publish a White Paper during the next session of Parliament setting out the powers and competences that the government would seek to repatriate from the EU, to commence the renegotiation of Britain’s relationship with the EU, and to put the outcome of those negotiations to a national referendum.” As I said before, this renegotiate-referendum strategy is Cameron’s best chance of heading off a full-scale rebellion on Monday,

Alex Massie

Gaddafi’s Warning to Other Dictators: Shoot First & Shoot Them All

Now that Colonel Gaddafi is dead, there’s a lot stuff flying about Twitter along the lines of Are you watching Mr Mugabe/Assad/Ahmadinejad? I’m sure they are. Few people are likely to mourn Gaddafi’s death but one should not, I fear, suppose that his eclipse weakens other distatorial regimes or vastly emboldens their respective opposition movements. It would be grand if this were so but foolish to presume it must be. Indeed, one can plausibly argue that a quite different message has been sent by this Libyan uprising and that this message warns other ghastly regimes to crack down harder and faster to ensure that dissent is suppressed before it has

What is Labour’s foreign policy these days?

As William Hague found before last year’s election, getting your voice heard on foreign policy is difficult for an Opposition. You are, at best, reduced to providing commentary to on-going events, vying not with the government for access to the media but with an array of better-informed foreign policy experts. Having a distinctive take on the changes in the world and practical ideas for how to affect change is harder still. You don’t have a 1,500-person strong Foreign Office.   For Labour, there is a different set of problems. Does the party opt for Blairite interventionism, tempered by the fiscal and political realities? If so, what’s the difference to what