The Bewilderness

Zimwatch: the corroded corpse of a liberal polity

Morgan Tsvangarai has had to escape from Mugabe's thugs as the fall-out of  street violence and politicised thuggery prevent the run-off election promised by the regime. This is a strange counterfeit, as Mugabe always took pride in preserving the forms of a legitimate government, even as the kleptocracy corroded the mask of the rule of law. There are few historical parallels in this descent from illiberal democracy to anarchy.

The rumours that Mugabe has now become a figurehead, and that his influence has been supplanted by an unelected junta sounds the death-knell of this regime. Elements with ZANU-PF are unable to legitimate their role within Parliament or the professions, when polite fictions are destroyed by brute force and immiserisation. Despite the overwhelming force required to supplant opposition to the regime,  it is unclear if Zimbabwe is set to join Myanmar as a military junta.

The bravery of Morgan Tsvangarai and the Movement for Democratic Change has destroyed the fiction that Mugabe enjoys the support of the Zimbabwean people. Governments in the West are right to remove all notions of legimitacy from his regime, even if the United Nations and African catspaws place sovereigntist inertia above this unfolding disaster.

No-one can tell how this will play out. Thabo Mbeki's dithering and final request for a government of national unity reflects his failed diplomacy and does not expel the criminal gang that degrades the country. South Africa remains the key player in this tragedy and this gangster state may stay a while until a new President takes office. Only then may we see the intervention that Zimbabwe requires.

More rights, fewer freedoms

Abu Qatada's plight will annoy Muslims and Britons everywhere. His plight will annoy fundamentalist Muslims as they will view him as an innocent father, deprived of his family, and humiliated by a tyrannical, supposedly Islamophobe, country. His situation will annoy Britons because his links to Al Qaeda are well documented, his threat to the security of this country attested and his willingness to live off the state publicised. Bad enough that he wishes to blow some of us up, more galling that we pay for it. Two views that undermine the judciary, the human rights regime, NuLabs liberal-authoritarian convulsions, and potentially, David Davis.

The judge was sitting at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in London, the same court which had previously described Qatada as “a truly dangerous individual” who was “heavily involved, indeed at the centre of terrorist activities associated with al-Qa’eda”.

But because Qatada has never been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK, and because he cannot be deported, the judge ruled that he had to be freed pending a last-ditch attempt by the Home Office to have the deportation ruling overturned in the House of Lords...

Police are expected to maintain a constant presence outside Qatada’s home to protect him from vigilante attacks, at an annual cost of tens of thousands of pounds.

The taxpayer will also fund at least £12,000 per year in benefits for Qatada, his wife and five children, even though Qatada was once found to have £170,000 in cash in his possession when he was stopped by police.

The government has not deported any individual living in this country who has been identified as a threat to national security. Part of this difficulty derives from the implementation of the Human Rights Act which the judiciary interprets as individual rights trumping collective security. This contributes to the perception of rights as a balance, a conflict, between freedom and security, leading to symbolic displays of ineffective authoritariansm and the erosion of liberty.

A return to the discourse of liberty is required: where freedom is the default position and individual rights are protected from state authority except where there is a threat and the individual can be deported to his country of origin. The current mess, a charter for lawyers fees and identity kit politics, has resulted in more human rights and fewer liberties, draconian laws and  snooping bureaucracy. Anti-terror laws that double up for snooping on bins. Only New Labour could strike a pose as Mr Atlas and kick sand in its own face.

Sarkozy's slow inaction farce

We do get occasional scare stories about European defence, often leaked by concerned parties, to prevent the development or stimulate outrage and head off the stupid idea at the pass. The latest wheeze,  indicative of the French presidency's concern with defence, is a European 'carrier group'. Since only Britain and France have aircraft carriers, this requires our cooperation for the branding.

As all exercises of this nature have proved desultory and symbolically return to barracks or dock after a few months, the latest idea will prove just as impermanent. We still await the Rapid Reaction Force, proposed in 1999, and rendered a slow inaction farce by bureaucracy.

The French president also renewed calls for a "modern, flexible" European force of 60,000 soldiers that could be deployed anywhere in the world for up to a year.

EU member states in 1999 committed themselves to achieving a Rapid Reaction Force of this size, deployable within 60 days. The goal was meant to be realised in 2003 but has suffered from flagging enthusiasm, lack of resources and duplication problems with NATO.

HFEA: saviour sons?

The passing of the new Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill highlights the complexities of dealing with scientific advances through legislation. The Bill was used to tidy up existing laws and repealed the Reprodutive Cloning Act, which prohibited reproductive cloning in 2001. Now, the new Bill allows Parliament to allow reproductive cloning on a vote without the need to introduce further primary legislation:

The Department of Health, however, has accepted that the legislation contains a flaw that could in theory make it easier for the ban to be lifted. Dawn Primarolo, the Health Minister, insisted in a debate during the Bill's committee stage that the Government has no intention of using this new power under any circumstances. She added that as new regulations would have to be approved by Parliament, there will still be democratic safeguards against cloning....

A spokesman for the Department of Health said: “This power can only be used to permit the practice of curing an embryo or an egg of a serious mitochondrial disease. The Government will not use this power to permit the practice of reproductive cloning.”

It is unlikely that such a process will ever be passed, unless reproductive cloning is sanitised. The hysteria that surrounded its prohibition in 2001 seems distant now that we are dealing with some of the practical issues in embryology. Whether prohibition played its part, or whether the impracticality of using a technique with few practical uses , dampened the debate is unclear. The emotive language of 'flaw' and 'loophole' are readily used by the media, even though a safe technique for reproductive cloning could finally be made available for certain genetic illnesses. Thus, hysteria may finally be reduced to the status of a 'saviour son'.

Labour's jack straw castle

The Labour Party is facing financial retrenchment or bankruptcy; the members of the National Executive may be liable in the event of insolvency. For a party run by lawyers, Blairite modernisation did not extend to the organisation. Delicious irony aside, this leaves the party in power beholden to the trade unions, their main backers. A resurgent Tory party, financed privately through donations from the wealthy, has established an unequal playing field. To overturn this lack of social justice, Labour is angling to gain a financial advantage by drying up and tying up Tory donations, whilst allowing the unions a free hand.

Francis Maude, the Conservative spokesman for the Cabinet Office, said the Tories would insist that there be no deal unless reform of trade union funding was also on the table.

The party wants individual members to give their consent before their funds are given to Labour.

Mr Maude said: "Any reform of party funding must clean up politics and end the big donor culture, and we will support sensible reform proposals that create a sustainable long-term settlement.

"However, taxpayers should be very concerned that Gordon Brown wants state funding for the Labour Party to bail out his failing political party from bankruptcy."

Labour now has less than two years to achieve another electoral victory and overturn Tory dominance in the polls. This demands a long game, where their hold on the legislature is used to gain advantage: expect to see a left-wing lurch to appease the unions, laws on party funding to suck at the taxpayer's teat and, if none of these work, a final, desperate tinkering with the voting system. Or perhaps they will just use the Civil Contingencies Act, instead and prorogue any party that is insufficiently European.

The EU's one child policy

The European Union faces a dreadful future of 'deathbed demography'. A death rattle from which it is unlikely any of the constituent nations of the European Union will survive in a recognisable form. The political classes on the Continent are complacent and strke a similar pose to the post-imperial civil service that ran Great Britain during decolonisation. They saw their role as one of managing decline, but found that their fatalistic decline was overtaken by events. The same fate awaits their successors in Europe, even as they commence the planned transition towards an unknowable future: gifting their countries to an unborn generation whose parents primarly come from elsewhere.

If one examines the response of the European Union to demography, policy is located within the Directorate for Employment and Social Policy. In spawning bureaucratese, the civil service have identified the demographic changes as an opportunity, not a challenge, although low birth rates, an aging population and general decline pose systemic cyanide for their welfare states. The Commission responded on the 12th October 2006 with a Commission Communication that proposed setting up an expert on demography to report on the major issue facing the Continent. This decision was dated the 8th June 2007 with a planned lifespan of five years. No sense for haste in any matters....

After eighteen months of the original challenge, the expert group has just issued its first report, and makes for stultifying reading. Their role is to promote the development of families and improve the quality of life for "persons with care responsibilities". We might define such figures as parents and guardians. Apart from the usual round of meetings and participation in other reports involving demography, the group has issued a brochure:

As far as the European Alliance for Families is concerned, the Group was involved in the preparation of a brochure to promote the use by local stakeholders of EU Structural Funds in projects aimed at supporting families.

The Alliance for Families is a website fostered by the Commission for fostering family growth and presumably more children although they state this objective. This is a state and taxpayer funded development that tells you what a good job some governments are doing of helping families even though they have not managed to reverse demographic decline.

The actions undertaken are risible, ineffective and testament to the European Union's unique combination of planned goals without expected outcomes. If the result is like the rest of their achievement, then birthrates will fall further and the crisis will accelerate. This could be called their 'One Child policy'.

Stagflation squeeze

The headlines from the Telegraph are determined to frighten in their intensity, with a self-fulfilling prophecy (they hope!), that the housing market is worse than it was a generation ago. Is 'generation' a codeword for the last Tory government? As this is the Torygraph, the answer is probably yes, with a competition in pain, with Labour designed to win by a mile.

The measurements are based upon the records of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, which track prices all the way back to 1978, a whole two cycles. Hence, this drop is the worst in thirty years.

The interesting vision in this accelerated transition from optimism to gloom, with the undermining of confidence, taking place in a period of nine months. The credit crunch began in August and its debt consequences continue today. Yet, the decoupling of a deflationary West and an inflationary developing world, squeezes countries like Britain in a stagflation squeeze, with the opportunity for alarming headlines.

We face a housing market that may drop like a stone, a rise in negative equity, and most seriously for the government, a reversal in its most quoted barometer: unemployment. This happens to government ministers when all the other indicators they like to quote start flashing red. But, with the appetite for tax on falling living standards, high inflation and low exchange rates: Labour's mismanagement of the economy is visibly reflected in pocket. Their paralysis is pitiful.

Silence over Israel fosters this political sepsis

Little wonder that the Israel envoy to Britain feels enjoined to speak out against a 'radical fringe'. For public debate of Israel has focused upon their relationship with their Palestinian counterparts.

Ron Prosor claims that while the UK was once admired for its liberal fairness and decency, in recent years extremists have "hijacked" its debate over Israel.

He says his country has been turned into a "pantomime villain" by Britons who deny it has any right to exist, while terror attacks on Israeli citizens are ignored by both the media and public opinion.

Mr Prosor, a senior diplomat who became Israel's ambassador to Britain last year, is particularly scornful of the academics who want to boycott Israeli universities over the country's treatment of Palestinians.

Israel has needed to take a more public stance and defend its democracy against the attitudes that an absence of  debate has allowed  space for the radical left to argue for the dissolution of Israel. It is fearful that the terms of trade in this country have shifted to the left allowing arguments about Israel's existential crisis to permeate the debate.  When these people argue, they would destroy the Middle East's imperfect and critical democracy for a potential warzone. Political idealism trumps reality and short-term suffering is justified for an ideological fit.

This is a polarised debate where academic boycotts are publicised by a fringe group without acquiring traction in academia. Yet, by their actions, they have damaged the reputation of British universities and freedom of the mind in this country. Where is the defence? Academic apathy has contributed to this damag, as silence has been interpreted, however unfairly, as complicity.

This is also set against the heightened backdrop of a government that is unfriendly to Christianity and Judaism. Ed Balls targeted Jewish schools for co-payments event at the expense of the security necessary to combat anti-semitic attitudes, fostered by the appeasing nature of this government. Since we are told so often that Balls is a boy wonder, one can only presume that the moral damage was weighed and found less worthy than the value of a soundbite. Now, we have Hazel Blears telling us that we live in a "secular democracy" [no, that is France, dear!] and that Islam deserves all of our attention and cash. Perhaps the affected parties play up to this dependency.

Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, defended Labour’s policy on religion after a report backed by the Church of England claimed that Muslims receive a disproportionate amount of attention.

She said it was right that more money and effort was spent on Islam than Christianity because of the threat from extremism and home-grown terrorism.

Ms Blears told BBC Radio 4’s Sunday programme: “That’s just common sense. If we’ve got an issue where we have to build the resilience of young Muslim men and women to withstand an extremist message.”

No doubt we shall be told that we can understand Islam better if they live under shari'a and we respect their differences, their territory and their need to build voting banks for Labour.
.

Tory decontamination requires deselections

How vulnerable is the Tory party to recontamination from sleaze? The recent reports of sleaze from MEPs have been an absolute scandal, reinforcing the widespread notion that these people feel they are a breed apart. Even after the examples of Den Dover and Giles Chichester, the Tory party faces resistance from MEPs who refuse to believe that their acceptance of public monies requires a level of transparency and public conduct, which they can only aspire to.

The Telegraph has learnt that 15 out of 28 Tory MEPs have failed to disclose full details of how they spend staff and office allowances worth over £200,000 every year.....

Hugh Thomas, the Conservatives' newly-appointed "head of compliance", will this week arrive in Brussels in an attempt to clear up a series of scandals over payments of staffing expenses to "family firms" and relatives of Tory MEPs.

However, Mr Thomas, dubbed "the cleaner", is expected to face widespread resistance. Four MEPs have completely failed to publish any details identifying companies that handle their allowances or have refused to reveal the number of assistants, or relatives, they employ with public money.

A further 11 have not fully complied with the requirements – mostly by failing to disclose the names of the companies handling their expenses. This has become a crucial issue after several MEPs admitted their money was paid to companies owned by themselves or families.

Cameron's relief depends upon similar revelations for Liberal Democrats and Labour, a relief that will be forthcoming. In order to steal a march upon his political rivals, and force a narrative of change, he has taken the risk of "cleaning up". As part of this calculated move, the more Europhile you are, the more likely that you will have failed to distance yourself from an opaque system that encourages you to "go native". With this manoevre, control is re-exerted over European Tories, directly or via deselection, if they refuse to toe the line.

The smell emanating from the European Parliament is said to be rank....

The abuse of the system by some MEPs was highlighted in February in a confidential report by the European Union.

According to the report, one MEP paid a Christmas bonus to an assistant which was 19 times larger than his salary. The report also reveals an MEP’s allowance was paid to a company where the business appeared to be trading in timber.

“This report is dynamite,” said Chris Davies, the Liberal Democrat MEP. “Let’s be quite honest. I think the allegations within this report should lead to the imprisonment of a number of MEPs. I think it’s embezzlement and fraud on a massive, massive scale.”

If the scale of these practices is as widespread and as arrogant as the Torygraph reports, then decontamination will require deselections.

Belgium's twilight

The Telegraph reports that authorities in Antwerp, that troubled Belgian city, have proposed that the disused churches are converted a mosques. This tidy, bureaucratic measure underlines the conversion of the city from Christian to  something else, that incorporates a strong Middle eastern element.

Many of Antwerp's 80 churches were built in the mid-19th century during attempts by the Roman Catholic Church to engineer a religious revival.

Father Jan, at the Sint-Willibrordus Church, conceded that the pews are "far emptier than 50 years ago", but rejected the argument that Antwerp Christians are a dying breed.

The ironic  outcome of  Father Jan's quotation  is  that Christians in Antwerp may well be dying but it is unlikely that they are breeding. This is the conundrum that many countries are now facing up to on a local level:  the uncomfortable consequences of demographic and economic decline.

Belgium is currently ruled by an unstable government that avoided political deadlock by postponing the contested issue of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde, partitioning the capital to ensure that Flemish speakers are separated from the Wallonian dominated capital. The French view this as the precursor to apartheid and the end of subsidies for schlerotic Wallonia.

The linguistic question was passed to a parliamentary panel that is due to report in July, yet Flemish parties have radicalised, demanding greater autonomy and acting on the ground to disenfranchise French speaking inhabitants. The Belgian political  classes are no longer able to contain this constitutional crisis, and have entered a dysfunctional twilight. The structure of the Belgian state fosters division between the French and the Flemish: a division that was not realised, due to the coalitions and cooperation amongst political parties that crossed and managed this divide. Now, that  system has foundered, since the Flemish parties now all appear united on the issue of language and spoils: a stance that can only result in the restructuring or dissolution of Belgium.

Since the European Union does not recognise self determination in its structures, this crisis will give important pointers to how the Union deals with successor states: does a 'hollow' belgium survive to preserve the fiction of a Member State; will the EU take over Brussels, as a supranational Vatican city; or is it flexible enough to recognise successor states?