The Bewilderness

Today's Guest Publication is...

Central Banking! I have not followed the Tory leadership contest with real vigour since there have been more than sufficient for the first decade of the twenty-first century. However, the recantation of Mr Clarke on the issue of the Euro and the Constitution has provided media fodder during the slow month of August. Given the retreat from Brussels of Tony Blair on the Euro, it is clear that Clarke has timed his revelation to maximum effect, gauging the level of support for his final contest with the New Right.

He went on to criticise the performance of the European Central Bank which sets interest rates for the eurozone.

"I think many people would agree that the ECB has to rethink the role it plays in the economic life of the nations it serves. It must stop imitating the Bundesbank which was an institution suited for the 1960s," he said.

In contrast, he praised the success Chancellor Gordon Brown's decision to give the Bank of England the operational independence to set interest rates in the UK.

"If by some unlucky chance I became Chancellor of the Exchequer tomorrow, I would immediately confirm my predecessor's arrangements," he said.

This is a favoured line amongst the Europhile cognoscenti, contrasting the transparency of the Bank of England with the secrecy of the European Central Bank. However, such arguments support a recent view that the BoE provides a suitable model for macro-economic reform. This has been pursued in the same issue of Central Banking by Professor Charles Goodhart, former member of the Monetary Committee. He accused the ECB of ineptitude, imprecise inflation targeting and inappropriate secrecy on monetary decisions.

Isn't this the 'original sin' of the Euro, adopting a one size fits all approach? The ECB has not been a successful Central Bank abd those who promote bank secrecy state that it insulates the bank from national pressures. The answer to this, of course, is that, without transparency, it is unclear how valid this argument is.

The ECB needs to balance the benefits of a more open approach with the risks that national actions could increase the volatilility of the Euro.  With the current differentials between Member States, the constituency for reform in the ECB may be cruxhed by a bunker mentality.

On the Offensive

The Muslim Council of Britain has demanded a public apology from the BBC over the broadcasting of a Panorama programme last night which they have castigated as a "travesty". A quick glance at their statement throws light upon their concerns, namely, that the programme aims to undermine the Islamic faith by presenting imams as extremists and that it is designed to "sabotage" the political participation of Muslims in the British mainstream. The most telling quote is,

It seems that to qualify as so-called ‘moderates’ Muslims are required to remain silent about Israeli crimes in Palestine, otherwise they are automatically labelled as ‘extremists’.

The refutation of the MCB's position is clear. In a society which values free debate, the Muslim Council of Britain should engage with the issues raised. Instead, they have imported the arguments prevalent in the Middle East, which damns all criticism as a Zionist conspiracy designed to undermine Islam. Muslims do not have to remain quiet about Israeli actions that they perceive as criminal. The problem lies with those who justify terror and the deaths of innocents by referring to Israeli actions and tarring every Jew and Isreali Arab with 'collective guilt'.

This rhetoric is not new, but the platform that Muslim political institutions are gaining in the mainstream media provides a testament to the paradox that they are increasingly confident and increasingly defensive. The popular demonstrations of the anti-war movement and the dividends reaped from the flanking alliance that Muslim organisations arranged with the hard left has gained the political wing of Islam legislative promises such as the outlawing of statements that are deemed offensive. By rubbishing the Panorama programme, the Muslim Council of Britain wishes to build upon these achievements by narrowing the public discussion of Islam in the mainstream media and excising a 'critical school'  that does not accept their arguments or values.

The terrorist attacks of July 7th have proved to be an opportunity for Muslim organisations regarded as 'mainstream'. Their spokesmen have been co-opted into government programmes providing channels of communication and extra sources of patronage. However, the terrorist attacks have also raised the profile of these spokesmen. Buoyed by the popularity of the anti-war movement, they have overestimated the depth of support for their views in Middle Britain, confusing the liberals who marched against the Iraqi war with the hard left. That is why we hear the overconfidence of Muslim anti-Zionists in our midst and a growing realisation in certain parts of the Labour Party that members of the Muslim Council of Britain hold illiberal views.

De Menezes: Thoughts

The death of De Menezes has ensured a range of opinion has been aired, ranging from 'cover up' to 'wait and see'. This has been accompanied, over the last few days, by the face and voice of Ian Blair popping up from 'Talking Politics' to the Daily Telegraph, in a PR offensive designed to show that the Met does not do 'spin'.

There is no doubt that 'police sources' provided many of the 'facts' for media coverage of the death of De Menezes - 'facts'  that were later proven false. Blair did little or nothing to control or stop this leakage. As a consequence, the perception that the Met was attempting to hide a mistake will prove difficult for the police force to counter.

Even if we accept that the chaotic methods of talking to the press showed that the Met does have the skills to spin and that there was no attempt to cover up this mistake, we must hope that this event  does not undermine the counter-terrorist effort.

Worst of all would be the trial of officers for murder, when their decisions were based upon erroneous intelligence and the incompetence of their superiors for not establishing watertight rules in identifying and eliminating 'suicide bombers'. Who would tell a police officer that they must risk their lives and also accept a risk of standing trial if the intelligence provided is incorrect?

The leaked documents indicate that the procedures for identifying and eliminating suicide bombers are weak. How can we tell? The death of an innocent man is proof enough. This happened on Blair's watch and his unwillingness to demonstrate a greater willingness to show that the mistakes made will be corrected casts doubt upon his suitability for office. No political party has called for his head as they do not wish to undermine the effort to prevent further bombings.

If the IPCC report proves critical of Blair's leadership, he should go. However, the Met needs to show, clearly and precisely, that changes are being made to prevent any future deaths of innocent men  or women without fundamentally altering the 'shoot to kill' policy for suicide bombers. This has not yet been forthcoming.

Such confusion feeds into the wider unease that now prevails concerning the British approach to counter-terrorism. Now is the time for the government to provide a more consistent approach to threat levels so that the wider public are no longer embarrassed by a police farce that shoots the wrong man and by a Home Secretary who cannot deport imams glorifying terrorism. Instead they are appointing Muslims, who have made statements that could be interpreted as anti-semitic, in official posts. The rules of the game have not changed.

Divorce In Sight?

Allan Massie has written a new book on the fraught relations between the English and the Scots that have existed for most of the last millennium. Entitled "The Thistle and the Rose: Six Centuries of Love and Hate between Scots and Englsh", the book has aroused a number of reviews on this potentially most important of subjects. John Lloyd, in the FT, notes that Massie's unionism provides a valuable description of the traditions invented by both Scotland and England at the dawn of the Victorian age, to reinvigorate shared but separate identities.  Massie hopes to provide a Scottish landscape that mirrors the fluidity of the relationship and refutes the small-scale civic hopes of Neal Ascherson in establishing an independent North Sea nation.

This metropolitan outlook differs vastly from the review undertaken by Michael Pye in the Scotsman. Beyond the remembrance of past grievances such as the destruction of clan societies, as a reviewer's right of redress, Pye considers Massie's coterminous view of Scotland and 'North Britain' as "monocular".  His criticism of Massie's narrow view is welcoming since Pye hints that there is a case for exploring new notions of Britishness which move beyond defences of the status quo.

There are noises off all through the text: the almost unspoken rows with the likes of Tom Nairn and Neal Ascherson, the gentlemen who do not see perfect virtue in this big notion of Britishness. But Massie has a Tory case, if only he'd put it in a wider context, with less attention to simply defending the ways things are and the way we see them. It is indeed fine for a Scots person to be educated at Eton - Ascherson might have to agree, after all - but it isn't quite the point. 

The Observer indulges in a display of angst and guilt, whilst replacing a review with contemporary reportage. There are more words on Scottish football fans than the book!

Alex Salmond, in a witty and sympathetic review, has the last word, since he argues that Massie, misled by his concentration on literary sources and reaction to Empire, views nationalism as a negative movement, rather than as a positive embracing of new identities. However, has Salmond underestimated unionism by concentrating on its aging Tory voices? All identities have the ability to renew and regenerate? Will unionism acquire its Ascherson, especially in an age of forthcoming decline?

 

Underground Tremors

We have heard little of the cracks running through English life due to the "Scottish Raj" or devolution. Andrew Neil, writing in the Spectator, provides a small vignette which shows that the issue has not gone away:

I see this resentment on the Daily Politics show I present for BBC2. When politicians from Scotland pontificate on English matters, the emails of complaint pour in. Some don’t even like the fact that I, a Scot who has lived in London for over 30 years, question Scottish politicians who have responsibility for English affairs. When do the English have a say? they ask, not unreasonably.

From Papyrus to Printing

Researchers at the University of Texas in Dallas have developed a new manufactory for nanotubes that allows their production at far faster speeds than heretofore seen.

Nanotubes are tiny cylinders of carbon atoms measuring just billionths of a metre across. They are light, strong, and conductive. But for years their promise has outweighed their utility, because the complicated processes involved in making devices from nanotubes were too slow and expensive to be used in large-scale manufacturing.

But now, nanotubes have gone into warp drive. Baughman's team can churn out up to ten metres of nanoribbon every minute, as easily as pulling a strip of sticky tape from a reel. This ribbon can be up to five centimetres wide, and after a simple wash in ethanol compacts to just 50 nanometres thick, making it 2,000 times thinner than a piece of paper.

The ribbons are transparent, flexible, and conduct electricity. Weight for weight, they are stronger than steel sheets, yet a square kilometre of the material would weigh only 30 kilograms. "This is basically a new material," says Baughman.

This is an important breakthrough, since it will hasten the use of nanotubes in different areas at a far cheaper price. This makes teh development of a space elevator more feasible.

New Post Down Under

Australia is undertaking a new recruitment campaign to lure British squaddies down under with promises of higher pay and better weather. The campaign has raised eyebrows as the annual target of 300 is far larger than any previous recruitment drive, The campaign is also focussed on specialised skills.

Given the shortcomings of the Iraqi campaign, the restrictions on booze in the Middle East and the disillusionment of the NCOs, there will be quite a few who jump at the chance to earn a dollar rather than a shilling. There is a shortfall of 2,280 soldiers in the British Army.

The B612 Foundation

The B612 Foundation has been established to "significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid in a controlled manner by 2015." They have a method designed to show how this can be done so that Earth does not take a fatalistic attitude to near earth asteroids.

Our preferred solution to deflecting an incoming near Earth asteroid (NEA), for reasons that are clarified below, is to rendezvous and "dock" with it at either its North or South Pole, realign the asteroid’s spin vector to a preferred direction and then push it (gently and for a long time) until we’ve changed its speed enough to miss the Earth. This scenario is very direct.

The only problem is that this approach requires a timeline of decades for notification. The Foundation has set 2015 as a target date for developing the technology for the NEA-tug, the ship that would carry out this mission.

An Ode to Joy

A number of Muslim organisations have issued a statement criticising the government's anti-terrorist laws. Their statement is revealing:

1. The term "extremism", frequently used in the public discourse about religion and terrorism, has no tangible legal meaning or definition and is thus unhelpful and emotive. To equate "extremism" with the aspirations of Muslims for Sharia laws in the Muslim world or the desire to see unification towards a Caliphate in the Muslim lands, as seemed to be misrepresented by the prime minister, is inaccurate and disingenuous. It indicates ignorance of what the Sharia is and what a Caliphate is and will alienate and victimise the Muslim community unnecessarily.

This first point is disingenuous as it begs the questions: would unification be with the  assent of all Muslims?  How do you define "Muslim Lands", since the Caliphate included large parts of the Balkans and Iberia? Extremism is associated with those groups who wish to attain these goals through violence.

2. The Muslim community in Britain has unequivocally denounced acts of terrorism. However, the right of people anywhere in the world to resist invasion and occupation is legitimate. Therefore the proposal to criminalise "justification" or "validation" of such self defence appears to be intended to stifle discussion about, and support for, such resistance. Thus anyone even verbally opposing the illegal invasion of Iraq, for example, could in future be made out to be justifying and supporting "acts of terrorism" and prosecuted. We are concerned that these proposed measures are intended to prevent the popular opposition witnessed in the run-up to the Iraq war should the United States wish to attack Iran, Syria or any other sovereign nation in the near future.

This is not strictly true, since many Muslims make a distinction between acts of resistance killing civilians in Israel and acts of terror in the West. Perhaps this distinction depends upon the 'covenant of security'. This point is designed to promote common ground with the Left, using the straw man of repression.

3. It is natural for Muslims to feel sympathy with fellow Muslims elsewhere in the world and to desire justice for those of them living under oppression. Many people compare the Israeli reality with South African apartheid and demand a similar solution. To denounce anybody who questions the legitimacy of Israel will be seen as an attempt to silence academic thought and legitimate political expression. If the government hopes to pander to Zionist pressure by condemning and excluding from this country people who are critical of Israeli apartheid, it is in fact supporting apartheid.

The comparison becomes fact with astonishing rapidity. It is a shame that Israeli Arabs enjoy a full set of civil rights, since this undermines the assertion about apartheid. The reference to 'Zionist pressure' does give the game away about their hang-ups over the Jews.

4. The proposal to ban the non-violent organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir is, in our view, unwarranted, unjust and unwise, and runs counter to all the principles which Western democracies are currently trying to promote abroad. Any disagreement with a political organisation must be expressed through debate not censorship. Whatever objections one may have to someone else's point of view, we must uphold their right to hold and articulate those views. If it is suggested that any laws have been broken by any individuals or groups then this must be proven by due legal process. Criminalising the mere possession of certain opinions is the hallmark of dictatorships, not democracies.

Unless, of course, you are guilty of making offensive remarks about Islam. That  is not an opinion, that is blasphemy, hence  not open to  debate.

5. The same reasoning applies to the proposal to close mosques if they are arbitrarily defined as being "extremist" or to try and politically influence what may or may not be said during a religious talk. This would amount to a collective punishment of the community and will be likely to create fear and prevent legitimate political discussion within mosques. This repression could lead to the very radical subculture which we all seek to prevent.

Just leave us alone, nothing to see here. Shouldn't imams be concerned about the spiritual health of their attendees? Perhaps rendering unto God rather than to Caesar would prove a valued object lesson.

6. The proposal to deport and/or extradite foreign nationals to countries known for gross human rights abuses is abhorrent to a civilised nation, irrelevant of whether or not a diplomatic assurance that deportees will not be mistreated is obtained.

This recent move comes across as a cynical attempt to resolve the problem of dealing with those currently under "control orders" after the judiciary found their continued detention without trial to be unlawful. Given that the alleged bombers on July 7 in London were British nationals, such an exploitation of the events to move against foreign nationals as well as unwanted asylum seekers is indeed shameful.

This list of concerns is not conclusive, but we are putting these issues forward to help prevent a knee-jerk reaction to recent events which would drive a rift between communities in the UK and set the course of British politics onto the slippery slope of intellectual censorship and totalitarianism.

Since this proves an intellectual defence for a non-violent version of the ideology that underpinned the suicide bombers, we would expect that Muslim organisations would provide much more than a token condemnation. Instead, they have decided to defend to the hilt, the public space that has allowed  jihadi actions to flourish. The references to Zionist pressure represent the conspiratorial perspective and sense of victimhood that resides just below the surface.   

Fo all the NULab spin, a proportion of the Muslims in this country have always been radicalised and do not intend to co-operate with the government in expelling jihadist elements.

Official Secrets

The Sunday Times has alleged that certain emails from Baroness Morgan, a director of government relations to an unknown recipient and Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, have not been released  under the Freedom of Information Act. The timing of this communication indicates that the emails were sent after Morgan had met Goldsmith and may have  involved legal interpretations of the Iraqi war.

It reports that senior government sources believe the e-mails contain a summary of arguments Downing Street was privately making to Lord Goldsmith.

Baroness Morgan and Lord Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, are reported to have met the attorney general to discuss the war days after he said an invasion could cause legal problems.

The government says Lord Goldsmith was allowed to work without political interference from Downing Street in the 10 days between the release of his original and final legal advice.

These emails, if leaked, would provide some missing parts of the jigsaw puzzle and add to the demands for parliamentary votes on declarations of war. They are not a 'smoking gun' however.