Could Israel affect Tony’s departure time-table?
July 30th, 2006-
How long can he go on with his cabinet so divided?
With the situation in the Middle East continuing to take its toll how long can Tony Blair go on pursuing his aggressive pro-Israel strategy which is so unpopular in the polls and according to this morning’s papers is opening up big rifts within his cabinet?
The main stories in the Sunday Telegraph, the Sunday Times and the Observer this morning focus on the critical statement issued by the former Foreign Secretary and leader of the house, Jack Straw, following a meeting yesterday with Muslin leaders in his constituency.
The Observer goes on to say that it can “…reveal that at a cabinet meeting before Blair left for last Friday’s Washington summit with President George Bush, minister after minister pressed him to break with the Americans and publicly criticise Israel over the scale of death and destruction. The critics included close Blair allies. One, the International Development Secretary, Hilary Benn, was revealed yesterday to have told a Commons committee that he did not view Israel’s strikes on power stations as a ‘proportionate response’ to Hizbollah attacks.
Another Blairite minister among the cabinet critics said: ‘It was clear that Tony knows the situation, and didn’t have to be told about the outrage felt by so many over the disproportionate suffering. He also completely understands the effect on the Muslim community - both in terms of losing Muslim voters hand over fist and the wider issue of community cohesion.’
Today Blair is expected to reinforce his opponents’ concerns with a speech to Rupert Murdoch executives in California when he is expected to say that Hezbollah must be rooted out of Lebanon if there is to be a lasting peace in the Middle East. Neither the contents nor the context of the speech will endear him to Labour’s mainstream.
-
The danger, surely, is that Blair’s detachment from the party coming on top of the loans affair could just create an environment where the Brownites feel confident of mounting a coup. September’s conference could be very interesting
So far Brown’s ultra cautious approach has stopped such a move - but there will come a point where the Chancellor might damage his own career ambitions if he continues to do nothing.
I still think that the 5/1 that’s available on Blair going in the final quarter of 2006 represents good value.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
When it comes to foreign policy, Blair seems to take a perverse delight in being out of step with majority opinion in his own country. Of course leaders are not there to just follow public opinion, but if they defy it too much then they are inevitably weakened due to the future electoral implications.
In the current crisis, Blair could not have followed a path more likely to bring about his own downfall. Senior Labour figures will be telling him that his blind support for Israel plays so badly with the Muslim community, that moderate muslims will desert Labour in droves at the ballot box (to abstentions, mostly, I would guess), and more radical Muslims will feel more inclined to repeat such events as the 2005 July bombings.
How does Blair think that he can ask moderate Muslims to support his so-called “War on Terror”, and at the same time infuriate them by supporting the current disproportionate Israeli action.
(Note BTW, that Israel certainly has the right to defend herself, but as Kim Howells said, backed up bu Jack Straw, if Israel is’chasing Hezbollah, then go for Hezbollah… don’t go for the entire Lebanese nation’)
You might be right about Gordon’s reluctance to force the issue.
Even though I am a great supporter I do believe that he has over-estimated the possible damage to the party of him and like-minded cabinet colleagues walking out if Blair continues to remain against the clear wishes of the party.
The main reason that there is so little public criticism of Blair by party loyalists is that we are all members of the same tribe and we do not wish to do anything that appears to be disloyal. It is my strong belief that once Tony has gone that tribal loyalty with switch to the Gordon and be even stronger.
I think Blair made a big mistake two tears ago when he sought to soldier on and that every day that he remains he causes even more damage.
It is easy to say that using a nom de plume on PBC. It would be much harder for me to do it openly.
..whoops.. why do we not have page review?
In my fourth para that should have been two YEARS ago though two TEARS is almost appropriate!
3. Freudian slip! (But So appropriate)
Just one thing, though. How sure are we that Gordon Brown’s foreign policy will be that different to Blair’s. What evidence do we have for this? Surely, the little that we do know would suggest that Brown would be even more pro-US than Blair (e.g. Holidays in the US, praise for US business methods while lecturing European finance ministers at every EU meeting).
Have the Conservatives said anything at all about the Middle East crisis? The Lib Dems have led the way in pursuing an Irsraeli-critical approach, but I can’t remember if Cameron & co have been quoted as having any position - could someone enlighten me?
And ‘Blair pursues his policy in spite of Cabinet and Labour opposition’ surely can’t be a breaking news headline? The issue is more that the discipline to keep it all behind closed doors seems to have gone. Good on Jack Straw, although I wonder if keeping his constituency onside was part of his motivation…not many cabinet members have seats like Blackburn.
5 - tpfkar, rather like Nicholas Soames who, when questioned on the issue of carbon emissions and whether taxes would have to rise on Any Questions mumbled something like “Not an expert … difficult choices … something must be done … ”
As someone said on here recently, it makes you wonder what on earth Bush has got on Blair that leads him to take such a position.
6 - well it would be a welcome change for certain politicians to accept that their expertise is somewhat limited
There is supposed to be a reason why we have ambassadors and a wider diplomatic service after all. Just because they don’t always say what the politicians want to hear…
Virtually everyone thinks that Blair is a little too pro-US, pro Israel in this situation
The thing is I am really not sure that any PM, Brown or fresh faced Cameron will have the ability to be any more independent. It will take balls of steel and a strong economic background to steer a independent course.
Blair’s balls are clearly in George W’s desk drawer.
Could the US be threatening a run on the pound if we don’t go their way? Fred if your out there - is this possible in 2006?
Is Trident a playing card?
Or does the CIA have a interesting photo album that it Blair would rather we didn’t see?
‘the Chancellor might damage his own career ambitions if he continues to do nothing’ I am beginning to think that Brown will be is No 10 for a shorter period than Jin Callaghan.
I think Cameron was goung to say something but he and Steve (Hilton) couldn’t decide what outfit was appropriate for a Foreign policy announcement. Khakis seemed too 90’s and chinos too frivolous so they’ve decided to splash out for a stylist and when they get the right one -perhaps as soon as next month-we should get an announcement
11 - well, if its foreign policy, perhaps it could be the national costume of one of the countries involved? He could borrow Prezza’s cowboy outfit, for example.
I can’t imagine another issue that would have angered Muslim opinion more than this. Iraq did have the unlovable Saddam regime at least but everybody loves Lebanon. And to watch a bully grind it to pulp over several weeks is more than most of us can bare. Blair is either poking a finger in the eye of the voters because he’s going anyway and doesn’t care or he’s lost his moral compass deep up Bush’s backside.
If his party have any backbone they will now try to remove him. Hopefully their mailbags will give them the strength. I’m just not sure of the mechanics. But once these dams get a crack in them it usually happens fast. Look at Thatcher. 5/1 is an excellent bet.
The Labour party does not have the killer instinct
Scotland on Sunday 30. 7. 06
Kennedy ‘plotting leadership comeback’
EDDIE BARNES
FORMER Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy is preparing to challenge for his old job again, it was claimed last night.
Forced to quit in January after admitting seeking treatment for alcoholism, Kennedy is now said be holding weekly meetings with key aides over a fresh campaign.
A senior party source is understood to have claimed that the Ross, Skye and Lochaber MP was “deadly serious” about making a challenge to Sir Menzies Campbell.
Kennedy issued a statement last night attempting to play down the claims.
“As everyone knows, long-standing friends and political colleagues remain close to me. We meet frequently and it is simply fanciful to read anything else into such a normal on going state of affairs,” he said.
However, there has been growing speculation that Kennedy may make a comeback, prompted by the disappointing profile achieved by his successor.
Sir Menzies is widely perceived to have faltered under the leadership spotlight. One source said that if he struggled at the Lib Dem conference in September then a bid could be mounted by Kennedy soon after.
My continual confusion about Blair’s foreign policy decisions is how - along with US foreign policy - over reactive it is. 2 months ago Blair was not going around saying that there could not be lasting peace whilst Hezbollah was in existence. In fact I don’t remember a speech where Hezbollah was even mentioned. Simillarly, before Iraq, Blair was a fully signed up believer in containment. It is like he has been brainwashed - like in some 60s paranoid spy thriller - with the trigger being George Bush banging his war drum.
The worst thing about Blair’s brainwashing (and you can see when it is being fully operated) is that he suddenly develops an exaggerated ‘walking to a duel’ walk (like his master) hands poised above imaginary 6 shooters. It’s like watching a couple of 6 year olds at play - world events are being decided by boys playing ‘The Alamo’ in the garden.
So in answer to Mike’s intro - who knows if it will hasten Tony’s end - but it should.
A strong crititism of Israel, and implicitly (or explicity) the US, could make our socialist govt’s foot-soldiers feel better.
And what else will it achieve?
15 - “So when did you stop beating your wife?”
17 - Morning David. Who are you backing for the leadership?
5: Hague wrote an article on it. Haven’t read it and can’t remeber which paper.
[19] I bought Pakistan 2nd inns runs, so I’m not in good form…
But I agree with MS that at 2-5 GB represents no value.
Just incase he’s lurking, here’s some “entertainment material” for Darren (DC).
17 David. You misunderstand the Labour Party and it’s supporters. Being on the side of the angels is enough. Over the last few years this hasn’t always happened which is why it’s support nearly fractured enough to cause defeat at the last election.
23 - I dont think David was asking what it would achieve for the Labour Party!
[22] Doesn’t that fall foul of US anti-pornography legislation, Tabbers?
I’ve just heard it dubbed “The poodle problem”
The Israelis have just killed 40 in one blast including 21 children. And even Fergal Keene sounds livid.
Liam Fox is rather worse than Blair. So now we have the Tory position. It just drives you to despair.
Jack Straw’s public position on this is interesting. Will there come a point where he finds that his contribution to the Labour party (and his constituents) would be greater by leaving the government than by staying in?
Perhaps the consequences of Blair’s refusal to operate cabinet government has finally caught up with him as cabinet ministers who are not party to a joint decision no longer feel bound by it - or at least not to the extent that would once have been the case.
27. Excuse my ignorance, I’m (supposed to be) studying. What’s Fox said?
What a crap government we have! Unfortunately the Conservatives are worse. Cameron can call photo shoots every time he changes the colour of his cycle shorts but when there is a crisis like Lebanon-which has led the news for the last two weeks-he’s absent. Infact he’s in Afghanistan but the Cameras that he spends his life chasing are in Beirut. Someone said he was good at PR but they weren’t sure about his political abilities. Looks like he’s not to good at PR either.
5
Yes, we certainly had the opportunistic empty rhetoric from Ming last week with his call for a UK arms ban on Israel;either he is completely ignorant of the unlimited supply of arms from the USA to Israel together with Israel’s own domestic arms industry or more likely was just trying to get a cheap soundbite to help his poor poll ratings.
No wonder there appear to be moves underway for a CK comeback.
31. It’s called morality. No one expects the UK’s arms ban to mean that Israel wont have weapons but if we disapprove of what they are doing then we at least shouldn’t be supplying them.
Hizbollah are being armed but it doesn’t mean we should supply them because they are getting weapons anyway.
So far Ming is the only leader to emerge from this mess with any credit
Gordon Brown is the player who always passes sideways rather than shooting from 20 yards; the batsman who declines every opportunity to hook a bouncer - I can’t pretend to speak for Labour supporters, but surely there must be millions of them yearning for Gordon to just bloody go for it? Fair comment, Roger?
33. If he doesn’t learn to hook this time he might struggle to find a party to lead. If two Cabinet Ministers resign I reckon we could see the putch we all want. Jack Straw is an obvious one but I cant see who the other might be.
30. Funny how when Paddy Ashdown went to Bosnia to see for himself the situation on the ground and meet the troops deployed, he was praised for it but when Cameron goes to Afghanistan for the same reason he is criticised for poor PR. Afghanistan is in danger of becoming the forgotton war and achieving success there is vital to the security of the region, though it may prove more difficult in the long run than Iraq.
However, you’re right that the Conservatives have been quiet on Lebanon. We let the country down over Iraq and in danger of doing so again (not quite a direct parallel as British troops are not being considered for an invasion, so there’s less that either the government or opposition can do). It’s all very well for Blair and Bush to talk of a lasting ceasefire, but the reality is that while Israel is surrounded by weak states - meaning both unable to enforce internal security and unable to resist external aggresion - there cannot be a lasting settlement; only temporary ceasefires. That therefore, must be what the international community must set as the objective.
Liam Fox this morning has made the Conservative position on Israel v Hezbollah very clear; good on them, its just a pity all these lefties can’t drop their bigotry for once and see sense. When you moonbats succeed in having sharia law inflicted upon the UK, I just hope you lot are the first to get buried up to your heads in sand, it would make a change from having your heads buried in it.
35 - Even funnier how irrespective of the thread to some people it always seems to involve having a go at David Cameron.
My own view is that Labour will do whatever it takes to avoid a messy handover. If there was you would be left with a hard-core of very angered Blairites which would clearly be bad for the party.
[36] One of the “nuke Mecca” crowd, are you, Jude?
This is a much more dangerous situation than Afghanistan. The danger of insurrection in the area is great. The pro Western governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt not to mention Lebanon itself are at great risk if this conflict continues. Iran’s race for nuclear weapons will be accelerated-and after seeing Israels treatment of Lebanon who can blame it-and soon no-one will be talking to Blair or Bush
39. Yes, but we are speaking with hindsight - Cameron didn’t know this was going to kick off just after he arrived in Afghanistan. He was never given an “Afghanistan or Lebanon” choice of prioritising.
However, the Tory reaction to this has been unacceptable in my opinion. A single article (several days old) by Hague is not enough.
Maybe my news-searching skills are particularly bad, but I still haven’t seen any of these quotations from Liam Fox. Anyone care to direct me towards them?
35 David. The reason that Ashdown was credited for his trips to Bosnia was firstly as a former SBS officer of some distinction he was seen as one of the military’s own and not just another photo opportunity politician and secondly Ashdown was banging on about the Balkans crisis and taking much flak, long before it became “fashionable”.
………………………………………
On Lebanon, Liam Fox and Margaret Beckett providing us with two shocking performances on the idiot box this morning. All we need now is Michael Moore, for he is the Lib Dem Foreign Afairs Spokesman, to provide us with a dud and we’ll have a full set.
39. I agree it’s more serious, I only said that Afghanistan would be harder to sort out than Iraq (because of the historic legacies of the countries).
FWIW, my pet theory as to why the neo-cons were so keen to invade Iraq was its geographic position, bordering Saudi, Iran and Syria. An occupation of Iraq would mean stationing an entire army in the most strategically useful position in the middle East. Given the Saudi king’s age and the uncertainty that always surrounds the succession, not to mention the internal opposition that’s been growing for years, a hundred thousand troops in the area might help ensure that any new regime supported the ‘right side’ if it looked dicey. That at least is how I think it might have been seen before 2003.
40 Julian. The Tories have taken a low profile on Lebanon because they broadly agree with Blair but are quite happy for the PM and Labour to stew on the issue without lending any undue support.
This has again allowed the Lib Dems to make some of the running on critisizing the government, although IMO so far Ming hasn’t hit the mark as often as he and Michael Moore (MIA) should have.
32
Its called empty opportunistic rhetoric.
34
GB is always conveniently missing when their’s something remotely controversial,you complain about Cameron not saying anything, Brown is meant to be our next PM within a few months and he’s in the UK!
Let’s also be clear about Straw’s motives for finally speaking up, which are to appease his constituents in Blackburn,hold onto his seat and to position himself for the deputy leadership.Shame we didn’t hear these cries of anguish during the Iraq war.
14. “The Labour party does not have the killer instinct”
Thousands of innocent civilians are killed in Lebanon by bombs transported through Prestwick with the connivance of a Labour government. Instinct or calculation?
44. If those were Straw’s motives, he’d have resigned over the Iraq War. In any case, MP’s should take some notice of their constituents - especially when they have a point.
40 - I think its more to do with there being both pro-Israeli & pro-Arab factions within the party. The last thing he wants to do is open up wounds on an issue that doesn’t seem to be moving many votes at the moment.
And yes the Lib Dems have been able to make the running but it hasn’t done them very much good.
43. I agree. The press love “stinging attacks” - all Ming and co. have to do to get some front-page publicity is say some very strong words about Blair’s Middle East policy or lack of. I honestly don’t mean this as a cheap jibe at the LDs, but sometimes I feel there’s a bit of the IDS about Ming - in the sense that even when he’s clearly in the right he struggles to get much publicity out of it.
BBCi quote “The prime minister, who held talks with President Bush at the White House on Friday, is now spending several days in California promoting his climate change plans and UK hi-tech business. ” - obviously NOT going just to smooze Murdoch.
Good to see how important Lebanon is to this Government - Blair enjoying the Californian Sun, Beckett planning her caravan holiday, Brown on paternity leave…Straw breaking ranks a tiny bit to shore up his vote.
Tony’s position on Lebanon is as probably as relevant as all thoise student motions at lefty universities calling for an end to nuclear weapons, in favour of the Sandinistas, etc.
For the record, what is the score? Hezbollah lobs unguided bombs onto Israeli townships, then we expect Israel to queitly evacuate al its northern third and do nothing. Why?
47/48 Max/Julian. Sometimes a political party or individual has to make the running even if “it hasn’t done them very much good”.
Churchill made the running on appeasement in the 30’s and much good it did him for many years, indeed almost costing him his seat after the Munich crisis.
17- David. Very true.
22- Tabman. Not sure what to make of that! Who was the lucky girl…
Blair is at his best when he stands up to and ignors most of the Labour Party.
52.”Who was the lucky girl…”
Ann Widdcombe
Tony Blair going, its getting worse than Mao’s death. Mao was reported dead 50 times over a 10 year period. Will we be treated to pictures of TB swimming the Thames to prove he’s still politically alive.
51 - I’m not saying he shouldn’t. Just pointing out it doesn’t have much impact with the public.
And I’m not sure the comparison with Churchill really stacks up.
55 Max. I’m not comparing Churchill and Ming …. Churchill was much older !! …. or their relaitve merits. It’s the principle that an individual or party may have to fight for a cause for many years for little reward, but still stay on the field of play.
51 - almost costing him his seat after the Munich crisis.
A bit tenuous since there was no general election between 1935 and 1945. Was there a serious campaign to deselect him though?
So. 63 per cent of the UK public feel that Blair is far too close to Bush on all matters East of Ramsgate. Blair himself, en-route to a luvvie-in job-seeker’s booze up in California (nothing like it for taking your mind off kids being blown to bits in cellars I’m told) stops off to do a bit of chekking that George B hasn’t got the same polyp problem as Ronnie Ray-gun had. Then he tunes into BBC on cable TV and discovers that helf-way up the sigmoid colon he encounters the backside of liam Fox who is covering the **** of his boss. Wouldn’t it be a good time now, given the size of the party’s debt, to have one of those fund-raising tours of Tela Aviv again? Tony could take Lord Levy and leave him there, chez Shirley Porter and Britsh justice could be spared a lot of bother.
The one thing about Fox’s performance, it just made me SO glad he’d given up the NHS for politics. But he’s missed his calling. A perfect replacement for Ian Paisley when he goes. Repetition after repetition of that glazed mantra. If Hain, Woolas and Reid are Bush’s poodle’s poodles, I reckon that makes Fox the chichuaha’s chichuaha. Should the Tory leader now be called David Chichahuamoron?
All this of course leaves a massive opportunity for ‘Ming’ to leap in and speak out for the British people. But will he drag his feet as long as Charlie Kennedy did in that other famous summer when pressure fron some in his ‘circle’ meant he lost months which could have made the Lib Dem contingent at the famous stop-the-war demo ten times what it was? Or is he really having to consider his ‘home front’ from a BBK (Bring Back Kennedy) plot as hinted in the News of the World? Sounds pretty daft to me but then you see the most sycophantic two-page spread in history in the Mail on Sunday’s Review, with Petronella Wyatt trying to ‘beef up’ his rather thin ‘crown prince’ Nick Clegg who apparently used to be a ski instructor, who she tells us. .. ‘would like to do a deal with the Tories’ and is ‘Fiscally Right Wing’. But perhaps Kennedy might be in with a chance if it’s not to be Mr ‘Downhill all the way’. Certainly Chameweon’s chances are not being helped by Peter Hitchens in the MoS joing with Rees Mogg, Tebbit, Parris etc in perpetually dissing him, albeit Hitchens is from a new angle, mocking his flock of Lzebians and neo-cons.
56 - Perhaps, but as leader of a party you have to avoid the trap of sounding more interested in foreign than domestic policy. Of coure judging by todays papers Ming might not be in the job for too many years (oh sorry, thats a non-story that we’re not supposed to talk about!).
Back to the main point of the topic does anyone seriously think their will be a move to get rid of Blair if he doesn’t change his position soon? I still think not.
From some comments it seems that some people just don’t understand that war isn’t very nice, that somehow war could be sanitized and refined for public viewing and contemporary sensibilities, I’ll refer to William Sherman….
“War is hell and you cannot refine it”
…in short you cannot have a sanitised war, the only way to win a war is to commit your entire strength and energy to it and fight at every level that your opponent would this is the only way a war can be won quickly and convincingly.
The state of Israel has been under siege for nearly fifty years, the Jewish people have been fighting attempts to eradicate them from the Warsaw ghetto uprisings to today’s bombing of Haifa by Hezbollah… in these circumstances is it any wonder that there response should be swift and unflinching? Furthermore what is the alternative?
It is ridiculous to suppose that when a group (in possession of a military wing) with representation within a nation’s government and the direct aid and support of foreign regimes attacks another nation without provocation (beyond that nation’s existence) that the nation being attacked shrug off such attacks, it has to respond with full force and vigour.
In the case of Hezbollah this is a group which is launching sustained and massive missile attacks on Israeli cities, killing Israeli civilians while at the same time for many years have been conducting raids and attacks on military and civilian targets across northern Isreal… that this group is an integral part of the Lebanese government and is rciving direct support from Iran and Syria makes strikes against it’s means of support (roads, bridges, fuel depo’s, train lines, training camps) entirely justified.
Furthermore, the fact that Iran and Syria are directly support these sustained and massive attacks on Israel, to the point of Iranian officers on the group coordinating these attacks further underlines the threat these states pose to the stability of the region, autocratic, repressive regimes launching unprovoked attacks on a liberal, democratic, republic… surely the case for military action or at the very least a more concerted and unyielding approach towards these nations could not be clearer?
Sadly it seems that many, on the left in particular, believe that this is not the case… that there is some kind of moral equivalency between the extremism, intolerance and aggression of Hezbollah, Syria and Iran and the actions of a Democratic Isreali state seeking to defend it’s citizens from indiscriminate attacks (be they missiles from Hezbollah or Suicide bombers from Hamas)… all this in the name of childish anti-Americanism, the preference of many for the Islamo-Fascism of Hezzbollah, Hamas or Iran over the actions of the democratically accountable governments of the west is West is not only baffling but faintly pathetic.
…I think that’s me done now
[23] The excellent Roger explains clearly why it is important to criticise Israel and the US.
‘For the labour party, being on the side of angels is enough’.
There is no pretence, and nothing constructive is offered. But it is honest and straightforward, and he must be now the second most important socialist to post on PBcom.
28 - Tony Blair has, indeed, basically ignored the clearly expressed will of the Cabinet. At any other time, we could be moving towards a major Cabinet crisis, perhaps leading to resignations. I don’t know whether there will be a Cabinet on Thursday, but if there is one, it could turn nasty if no developments turn up in the interim. Blair could be reduced to pleading that “something will turn up” then. If this situation continues over the holiday, lines will harden just in time for Labour’s conference.
[57] Oh yes - had there been a 1940 election CCO had strict orders to ensure that Epping Forest deselected Winston…
59-Max,I can’t see a move against Blair. He is their best and only asset.
If Labour want to have any chance at the next election they need him to stay on and lead them in to the next election. The more he is at odds with the lefties in his party, the more respect he will earn from those needed to keep him in power at the next GE.
If they have any sense at the Labour Party Conference, they will all be chanting “Four more years”.
9. If you are thinking of a run on the pound such as occurred during the Suez crisis, then the answer is no. Back then we had a fixed exchange rate system and a very weak balance of payments position. That left us at the mercy of the USA which provided the finance to plug the said deficit from year to year and so maintain the pound’s (overvalued) parity.
15. My bet on Ming departing within two years looks increasingly like a banker.
62 - Everyone knows he will go fairly soon and his colleagues probably also know that even if he was to be critical of Israel it would have no practical impact.
It just doesn’t make sense to me for the Labour party to contemplate a potentially bloody coup when all they have to do is wait for him to go.
64. “If they have any sense at the Labour Party Conference, they will all be chanting “Four more years”.
No doubt, DC, as part of their economy moves to ease their overpowering debts, the Tory and Labour Conferences will be merged this year and you can be at the front of the self-interested gang of blue Chichuacha-boys who will be shouting it loudest!
57 book value. The war precluded an election in 1940. The Conservatives considered a “post Munich bounce” election in 1939, an election that Churchill said would be a “constitutional indecency”.
For about almost two months after the Munich crisis Churchill was in trouble in his constituency after the Conservative Whips let it be known locally that the Chamberlain wouldn’t be averse to a change of member in Epping. Churchill managed to ride out the storm, although not without some uncharachterisitic smoothing of local ruffled feathers.
Ironically Churchill was back in office within a year and PM in May 1940.
I think Cameron’s problem in the present Middle East crisis is that although he may want to the majority ( but not all ) Conservative activists are rabidly pro Israel and oblivious to Israeli atrocities against women and children . Cameron would rather say and do nothing than make a definite statement on what Conservative policy is on the crisis .
57 I can’t give a source at the moment but I think there were more than murmerings about deselecting Churchill . Don’t gorget that a GE was due by 1940 anyway .
Roger is right. There is a deep streak in Labour that prefers taking an idealistic, unrealisable position to actually achieving something, and it’s deeply embedded in the party. It emerges at various times throughout the party’s history, going back to Macdonald’s and other’s opposition to WWI and perhaps even before that. Blair’s problem is that he’s lost the internal weapons he could use against this type of thinking in the party.
It is easy for the Cabinet to carp from the sidelines, but the grave consequences of abandoning Israel mean that in reality, all of them would take the same position as Blair if they were PM, and Blair knows it. I am no fan of Blair on domestic policy, but I hope Blair does not have to leave Downing Street over this issue, one in which in my view he has it absolutely right.
67 - zebidee
“self-interested gang of blue Chichuacha-boys”
How mature, been giving Douglas Alexander tips lately?
[60] Ben, who here is a Hizbollah apologist? I notice the lack of quotes in your rant…
You admit your own problem when you drag in the Warsaw Ghetto - as I said the other day on Bullseye’s blog: an Israel at peace with itself and its neighbours wouldn’t be Israel
Ben “How can anyone at all with their tarsals linked to the soil of the planet come out with rubbish like: “The state of Israel has been under siege for nearly fifty years” ?
The state of Israel was CREATED BY A SEIGE which has continued ever after and the beseiged people are just coming to terms, many many years later with the idea that they might just have to let the grandchildren of those theiving terrorists who did the work of the anti-semitic Britsh and other European politicians of the 1920s-50s for them in clearing out of much of Europe our shameful reminder of the hoocaust, stay amongst them if not lording it over them.
68 - There were also moves against other anti-Munichities in the Conservative Party. Several faced similar problems to Churchill. The Duchess of Atholl was actually deselected, forced a bye in Kinross and West Perthshire, and, despite Labour and Liberal support, was narrowly beaten by an official Conservative candidate. Harold Macmillan even had informal discussions about joining Labour at one point; Attlee, in retrospect, went so far as to say he could have eventually led Labour if he had joined.
69 - That post is really beneath contempt Mark. Had it ever occured to you that it’s possible for people to disagree with you without being ‘rabid’. I suspect not.
66. But if it’s tedious for us imagine what it must be like for them. Politicians don’t tend to be patient.
“We have to stay here”
“Why?”
“We’re waiting for Gordo”
“Oh yes”
(that’ll be the last time, I promise)
What is a blue Chichuacha boy? Sounds kind of hip…
I’m starting to think Blair really should go for a fourth term. Go on Tony, you know you want to and you would be stopping Gordon!
78. Ha, I can see the press conference now.
“Sometimes…” “…people…” “…change their minds, you know…” “…I’m a pretty straight kind of guy…”
72. Innocent, Ben is the kind of ranting kid who would probably no more confront an arab who had stolen a comic in a bookshop than he would achieve perspective on anything. Those of us who, for their sins, have had to grapple hand to hand for our livesa with thugs who just happen to be Arab, do not differentiate Hizbollah terrorism from Israeli terrorism designed to try to get the ‘West’ to allow them to define 2006 (with all it’s most recent land-grabs on the west bank) as ‘Year Zero’.
72. Ben, at least when Zebidee insults someone, he tends to do it in a sarcastic way (leaving you uncertain on how to reply), while the last part of your post at 60 was just insulting people on the left (in a pretty simplistic generalisation) with comments like “pathetic” and co
65. My bet on Ming departing within two years looks increasingly like a banker.
The trouble is that many of the people close to Ming look like bankers too.
76. The subject of the Middle East appears to bring out the very worst from our Lib Dem posters. Quite disturbing, some of it.
79. “go on Tony, you know you want to and you would be stopping Gordon!”
. . . which would be more than any other Tory might stand a chance of doing!
65 Thanks for that Fred. Obviously getting a bit paranoid this morning.
Nevertheless, I would be interested to know what leverage the US govt. or EU could have over the UK economy without resorting to formal sanctions?
Plus, the economics of the current conflict is also really interesting. Who is making money out of it?
82. Boom boom
““Sometimes…” “…people…” “…change their minds, you know…” “…I’m a pretty straight kind of guy…” ”
Aha Julian! You have put your finger on it. THAT was what Cameron was doing in Afghanistan. He’s obviously gone off there for a private semi-brain transplant (much cheaper than private in Europe and the queue too long on the NHS) , with his ‘Minder’ Dr Liam Fox to make sure they take out only the ‘unsound’ bits. Look out for the bandages when he’s allowed out into the public eye.
81 - I’m not sure if I agree with you on the charming Zebidee Andrea but I agree that you shouldn’t make sweeping statements insulting a whole group of people for their sincerely held views.
The problem with this topic is that it seems some people are so sure of their own position that they don’t try to understand how others can feel differently.
“charming Zebidee Andrea”
What a dangerous merger! We will both forgive you for that dropped comma I’m sure.
Might one suggest that you make a mantra for yourself or your last sentence?
I doubt very much if Liam Fox is expressing “the Tory position”. He is expressing his own position, and in the absence of any contradiction will imply that it is the Tory position.
88. Max, but I didn’t state my opinion on the lovely Zebidee. I’m sure we can find an agreement…I just said he insults in a sarcastic way.
On your last point…yes, that’s why I tend not to post about this issues.
85. I’m a bit puzzled by the first part of your question…what kind of scenario are you trying to construct? there are, I suppose, a variety of informal obstructionist things that could be done on the trade side, but in what circumstances would this happen ?
The easy answer to part two is - oil producers. The latest Middle East conflict has helped drive oil prices still higher, boosting the coffers of Saudi Arabia, Libya etc. within the Middle East and big producers like Venezuela and Russia outside it. Conceivably some munitions manufacturers might be finding their order books a bit more buoyant too, but this is very small potatoes compared to the massive windfall gains of the oil producers.
Alex if Fox’s is NOT the official Tory position, on something he’s just spent a week with his boss on and where he is the official Tory spokesman, then there will be a vacancy for David Owen pretty soon!
75 Observer. Thanks for that info.
The Duchess of Atholl twice resigned the Tory whip before resigning and then losing her seat in December 1938. She was quite a character visiting Spain during the civil war in a Bentley with bagpipes in tow, she visited hospital prisioners held by the Republicans although whether her playing of the pipes added their recovery is unkown. She also composed music to the works of Robert Louis Stevenson and others. My mother, the Dowager Lady Jack W, met her on many occasions as the Duchess was a regular at the Perth races.
69 - I would suspect the opposite. The bedrock of Conservative support is not particularly “gung-ho pro-Israeli” to put it mildly.
86. “Boom Boom”
Is this to be the last contribution to this debate from Dr Fox, or ‘Mr Bomb Stopover’ as he is known to his friends? For heaven sake DC, replace him with Edwina Currie. A much better choice for advice on these hot summer nights when the polls are going **** up!
93 - since when is Defence spokesman the official spokesman on foreign affairs?
The Conservatives problem is that politically they would probably like to make a few critical noises of Israel (as Hague started to). However that would lead to big problems in the Shadow Cabinet, led by Fox (backed up by the wider credibility he claims in the party from the leadership contest), and with Murdoch.
So best strategy, say nothing!
94 - I suspected you’d have a family connection to her somewhere, Jack
95 Alex, I think you are confusing two things. While there is still a fair smattering of (normally hidden) anti-semitism in the older ranks of quite a few Conservative associations I do not think that this spreads in any significant way into diminished support for Israel. After all, none of their newspapers tells them that is the right line to take.
Interesting article in today’s Guardian re. the left and radical Islam…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1833395,00.html
The first part of ‘Operation Ming Cowley Street/Cameron Downing Street’ is getting harder by the day despite all the efforts going in.
We will have to make a decision soon on the Labour leadership. I will be pushing for us to try and ensure Blair stays on and goes for a fourth term. While electorally one would expect that is not as good for us, the fall out within the Labour Party will be amazing. The in fighting could outweigh the advantages for us of having Brown as Labour leader.
If I get my way then we could merge Operation ‘Ming Cowley Street/Cameron Downing Street’ with this and just call it ‘Operation Status Quo’.
96
Talking about replacements,how much longer does Ming have before being replaced by CK?
91 - I feel the same way Andrea. Sometimes its safer to say nothing!
98. They probably went to school together.
97, Alex, haven’t you grasped yet that Fox is their shadow secretary for WAR? How much ‘defence’ do you think UK troops get involved in these days?
Liam Fox, with Gove and his ilk, are isolated in the tories in their suppport for Blair’s position. Hague is very critical of Israel. It’s a vast step forward from the IDS ‘Blairer than Blair’ position and should be encouraged. With today seeing the situation lurch from bad to worse, the labour lackey posting here yesterday must be washing the blood off their hands at this very minute.
WIth a thread on Israel for once (and having unavoidably mentioned it in every thread which hasn’t been about it!) just to be perverse, can I point out the copyright laws which Blair is seeking to change. Having accepted bribes in kind from Cliff Richard this is *something else* which Blair seeks to ally us with the US and not to have our own independent and more logical position.
I have friends who run record companies working with public domain recordings so I know for a fact how they feel that they are being betrayed for the sake of the US lobby.
More Blair cleaze in any case. As inevitable as the sun coming up in the morning by now.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2292075,00.html
105 - Wasn’t aware that our armed forces had any role in what is going on?
There’s a difference between having strong support for Israel and believing that their actions are in either our or their interests. In fact all the indications are that the whole thing is going very badly, but having gone in so hard they have no political escape route. If anything they need the US to “step in” as they would have done in the past, but it doesn’t look like happening.
100. Fred, thanks for that reference: what a total intellectual lightweight. There was a time when you could read the ‘Staggers’ and disagree with what they have to say but at least recognise the intellectual consistency and eloquence of presentation. That drivel (says ‘I am’ at least half a dozen times in one form or another) could have been churned out by Melanie Phillips in a single spell under the hair dryer. Have they ever been seen together in a public place, incidentally?
UKP You are right about Hague - I’m not sure whether he’s been sidelined or is sidelining himself for a minute, waitibg to see if DC dobbs himself (&co) in it even more than he did over the EPP.
Perhaps we should run a book on who comes back fastest, Hague or Kennedy? And how many denials per month we’ll get from both camps in the interim?
98/104 Observer/Andrea. Only very distantly related to the Duchess her by marriage to the Duke. She was the daughter of a Scottish baronet - Sir James Ramsey.
The Dowager was some 50 years younger than the Duchess who I think died in the early sixties in her mid 80’s. I’m unsure which school the Duchess attended.
77 - Does that make Prescott ‘Pozzo’ (corpulent and useless) and Ian McCartney ‘Lucky’ (talks b*llocks and nobody has a clue what he’s saying anyway)?
(knowledge of Samuel Beckett would aid understanding of this post!)
108. Was there ever a time when anyone could read things penned by you and ‘recognise the intellectual consistency and eloquence of presentation’?
20 Lebanese children killed in war crime:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5228224.stm
Blair has a limited amount of time to change tack or this may well be the (Jack?) straw that breaks his back.
95 - Exactly, I think some labour supporters are conveniently forgetting the poll which showed that they are by far the most pro-Israeli with tories some way back and lib dems even further.
Zebidee - 74/80
Further erudite and informative comment…
“…the kind of ranting kid who would probably no more confront an arab who had stolen a comic in a bookshop than he would achieve perspective on anything.”
…where there any further little gems that you’d like to regale me with? I’m sure there will be, but perhaps you could employ such constructions in their proper forum, namely the playground.
As to your confused, rather rambling assertion that Israel was created by siege in an effort to remove the remaining Jewish population from Europe, even you must see this as ridicules… though I wont hold my breath.
Israel was attacked on its creation in 1948 by a vast collation of Arab states, with the intention of totally annihilating the new born state, thank the ingenuity of it’s people humiliated the Arab armies, since that time the Arab states, often in an attempt to placate and divert their oppressed citizens have attempted to wipe out the state of Israel, and every time the Israelis have humiliated the aggressors… how is this not siege? But no doubt the history lesson may be lost on you… so I’ll stop there.
73 – Innocent.
I apologise if what I said was construed as equating everyone who has criticised Israel’s recent actions as an apologist for Hezbollah… my point is simply that two few people appreciate the huge moral difference between the actions of a democratic state such as Israel, a democratic republic and terrorist groups such as Hezbollah and tyrannies such as Iran and Syria, to rarely it seems that critics of the Israel, the US and “the war on terror” in general often fail to appreciate the this great moral difference, often out of misguided (IMHO I should stress) ideology that rejects the very idea of absolutes.
72 – Andrea.
Again, as with innocent, my apologies if the use of the term “pathetic” was offensive, it is simply that I feel very, very strongly that the conventional approach of many of the left to international relations, which has been very critical of Israeli and American foreign policy is fundamentally in error as a result of it’s attachment to a relativist attitudes.
I do not seek to offend, I merely believe, passionately that there are many on the left who are gravely, gravely in error and that the adoption of their proposed policies would risk disaster for this country, it’s interests and it’s allies… this is my firm belief and as a result it’s hard to be nonchalant in the circumstances.
My Mother in Law, sadly deceased, was in the same class as Stanley Baxter - does that count in the Scottish nobility stakes Jack?
112 - How so desperately true. All of us - and ironically the LibDems most of all - have so much to owe to the discerning judgement of the citizens of Oldham East and Saddleworth. In one of the most marginal Lab-Lib Dem marginals, they actually increased the Labour majority. Had they not shown such wisdom, this Zebideean splenetic lunatic would have been a Member of Parliament.
The latest news today is that Ireland refused the USA permission to land flights carrying weapons to Israel.
This suggests that, in theory, Britain could also refuse such flights.
Ben
I totally agree with you. I find Zebidee’s ill informed rants, frankly, offensive. The fact is that until terrorist groups like Hezbollah are eliminated there will not be security for Israel or the Middle East.
Hezbollah not Israel are the aggressor here. Israel withdrew from Lebanon but UN Resolution 1559 was not fully implemented because Hezbollah were not disarmed. Instead they have built a massive arsenal of missiles and trained fighters.
The trigger for current conflict was Hezbollah’s invasion of Israel and kidnap of soldiers. Arguably a Lebanese invasion as Hezbollah are part of the government of Lebanon.
Israel would happily settle for secure borders and peace. Hezbollah (and by extension Iran) are bent on conflict and attacks on Israel.
If Mark Senior, Zebidee and other rabid anti-Israelis would open their eyes, they would not support the terrorist side of the case!
It is quite significant that when the Lib Dems allowed Tony Dawson (Zebidee)to run for Parliament he had a poor result.
Ben posted sensibly, cogently and without hysteria.
The response from Dawson is frankly outrageous. Obviously he suffers from some awful slight at some time by a Jew.
Rantings that would not be out of place in the wilder speeches of the Iranian President, Mein Kampf or Der Sturmer are not an excuse for cogent argument in a delicate situation.
I trust Campbell or whoever is Lib Dem leader at the next election will think carefully before releasing Dawson on the public as a an official candidate.
9 Jonathon I think your first supposition is right. Whoever was in Downing Street at this time would have to follow more or less the same policy as Blair. It might be spun a little differently but it would be the same.
We do not have the power to force a change in Israeli or US policy and if we go the way of France we would end with no influence either.
It is true that this is only partly because of the current overall political and military power balances. A large part is also due to Blair’s complicity in the whole Iraq mess and he cannot rat now otherwise he goes down ( George, on the other hand will sail on for another couple of years and be sad Blair has gone but not feel the loss that much). But no PM, Brown or Cameron, could ignore the political realities of a war in Iraq and Afghanistan and troops on the ground and what the effect would be of an apparent crack in the alliance. Sticking together or sinking individually are the options, and get it wrong and a lot of other lives will be at risk.
And unless a party leader has something to say that they can live with for a long time to come, it is best to keep quiet. Campbell has nothing to lose but Brown and Cameron will be only too well aware that the Middle East mess is not going away for a long time and they may well have to deal with it in the none to distant future.
119 - Rik I don’t think it’s fair (as I pointed out to Mark) to say they are either rabid or pro-terrorist although I do agree with some of your other points though.
I would have thought you would be more concerned with the grave news that CK may wish to challenge Ming Cambell for the Lib Dem top job. What can we do to help prop up his flagging leadership?
122 - Max I take your point but I was rather turning their own comment back on them.
I agree - “Long Live Emperor Ming”!
115. Ben, I didn’t take the pathetic thing itself as a strong insult to be fair…but it was the general feeling that criticizing Israel would mean being an apologist for Hezbollah, but you’ve already addressed that point replying to Innocent Abroad
119. Again, Rik, you seem not to accept the fact that being critical of Israeli doesn’t mean supporting the terrorist side.
Again that’s why I dislike those debates. You’ve people like Ben and Rik that tend to make people critical of Israeli sound like terrorist and terrosit supporters.
Then on the other side there’re people (not seen in today’s thread, but IIRC they surfaced in other threads) that tend to make pro-Israeli people sound like mass-murders.
Both approaches in debating the issue are wrong IMO. Probably as Ben said, they’re driven by feeling passionately about that topic.
124 - Well said Andrea. But did you have to spoil it with that terrifying picture!!!!
Rik at 119. Can you ‘eliminate’ a terrorist group by force? -surely the lessons we learned in NI are that, although you can defend yourself better against attack with military force the idea of extinguishing a terrorist movement militarily is a no-no?
Part of Isreals problem in my opinion is their constant use of overpowering military force which all our experience of history proves often just makes your enemy stronger, by giving the terrorist more of an ‘excuse’ to exist.
Arab terrorists are clever at using phsychology as much as force in battle.
What bothers me is that since 9/11 America has fallen into the same trap - over-reacting to provocation by Arab terrorists.
You are far better placed to answer my point than most on here, do you genuinely believe that Isreal can win this one, however long the West gives them?
124. Absolutely spot on. Polarising arguments inherently creates an adversarial situation which is essentially the cause of all conflict. Thus conflict cannot be solved by taking a polar view. This is the cause of all failed peace plans.
I find it staggering that while both Lebanese and Israeli civilians are murdered by terrorists and terrorising governments, people can still be callous enough to describe themselves as “pro-Israel” or “anti-Israel”.
If we can’t be reasonable and balanced about the situation from the comfort of safe western Europe, no wonder it’s impossible to find compromise in the actual war zone.
125. Max, I tried to be “purer than pure” and not partisan….now I’ve finished my sensible comments of the day
I know you prefer this picture!
122,123- Max, Rik. Glad you are on message about Ming.
CONSERVATIVE POSTERS PLEASE NOTE:
It is vital that we keep Ming in the job. Please can we have a two week period of no critisim of Ming whatsoever. It is risky enough with myself breaking cover and posting about ‘Operation Ming Cowley Street/Cameron Downing Street’ as it is.
128 - Well it’s better than y-fronts! My own favoured swimming pool attire are kind of swimming-shorts - not unlike a pair of hot pants. As you can imagine I’m very popular down at the pool!
130. I thought the hot pants thing was more popular…but it depends on if you’ve something to put in it.
Then when I spent a week long holiday at the sea at the beginning of the month, I noticed that some people are still wearing speedos.
126 - Marcus I take the point. Israel certainly risk creating more martyrs and more recruits for Hezbollah. HOwever, if they can cripple their capability to wage war they will have created some facts on the ground that the UN can police.
I dont agree that we couldnt have used more force against the IRA. We were winning the “military” war, which is why they came to the table IMHO, but it was a combination of effective intelligence and surgical military actions.
There are many examples of eliminating terrorist groups by military force through history, many of them by Britain! eg. in Malaya and other territories.
It just gets worse for Labour. Now Prescott (acting PM!) is being sued by a journalist:
http://www.sundaylife.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=700455
[80] Zebidee, I wish I did think Ben was no more than a “ranting kid” - you may recall that he was a Labour activist at the time of the Leicester by-election who has now moved to a political position more akin to that of Pat Robertson than of any British politician, let alone party.
It is basically an anti-modernist position. To check whether or not you are yourself a modernist, please conduct the following thought-experiment.
If I say to you, “your existence is incompatible with my self-respect” then I am the one with a problem. A modernist is anyone who regards that as a truism, hardly worth saying. Put another way, a modernist believes that for X to abuse Y, X has to do (or possibly deliberately omit to do) something.
“Fundamentalists” - like Ben - whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim, don’t accept that at all. They can’t cope with the idea that they may be no better than other people, and so they devise a fairy story in which if they perform certain rituals, they will exclsuively benefit from divine favour - I don’t need to go into details here, we can all think of examples easily enough.
[132] Rik, if you think that, given the way Israel is prepared to shoot and kill U.N. observers, that there is ever going to be a U.N. “green zone” of the Cyprus type in southern Lebanon, I can only suppose the sun’s got to you…
Ben, it is clear that you are not a hypocrite, since a hypocrite knows full well he is saying completely opposite things. But your posting here takes the biscuit:
“As to your …assertion that Israel was created by siege in an effort to remove the remaining Jewish population from Europe, even you must see this as ridicules…….
Israel was attacked on its creation in 1948 . . .,”
So explain to me please, how Israel was ‘created’ in 1948 if not under/via siege? Was it the work of tens of thousands of Dutch land reclamation enginers? A prize in the Spanish lottery? Perhaps if you were to place the co-ordinates of your own back garden on the internet then we might encourage a set of gypsies turfed out from elsewhere to enforce their settlement there for the next 100 years, kicking you out in the meantime? it is intriguing that all this is happening while the mail family of newspapers are telling us we’re just about to be ’swamped’ in our own country by Eastern Europeans. Edwina Curry said on the Tv this morning that ‘thank God’ we are now a multiracial country. is this today’s Conservative policy? What about tomorrow?
All these silly children cheering on the big strong American (or American-backed) soldier when they personally would not say boo to a goose. I cannot say that when I sat down to lunch with the then President of Israel that I agreed with him on eveything, any more than I deid in my rec