The Bewilderness

Labour's Abolition of the Secret Ballot

With fraud now endemic in many city seats due to postal voting, there is a strong possibility that the results on Thursday will be tainted. Due to the lack of safeguards demanded by the Electoral Commission, all political parties can solicit votes without difficulty and effectively import the communal politics of the third world, disenfranchising marginalised groups like women or the poor. New Labour talked social justice and promoted the opposite.

The Sunday Times identified illegal practices in their undercover exclusive on Labour's activities in Leeds. This confirmed the conclusions of many observers:

Richard Price QC, an expert on electoral law, said: “I look at the situation as like a large bowl of water. Previously there were a couple of holes in it — isolated cases of fraud — but suddenly it has become a colander. It is a completely unnecessary crisis. With postal voting you have abolished the secret ballot, and your investigation is a classic example of this.”

Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an academic expert on elections, added: “Postal voting on demand is inherently unsatisfactory. The whole system is open to abuse. Secret ballots were introduced in 1872 to stop exactly this sort of problem and we now seem to be going back to the 19th century.”

This will cast a jaundiced light over this week's elections. As Labour has fewer candidates, the temptation to deploy illegal practices and maintain their control over councils may be overwhelming. It could be disastrous for the party if results are out of line with polling expectations and depend upon postal votes.

As a coda, Reid's call for unity in the Labour party will have the opposite effect to that intended. The public will now see Brown's leadership as a coronation, lacking democratic legitimacy at party and national level. Without opposition in the party, how will Brown cope with sharp criticism in the Commons? If there is no polling 'bounce', the Labour MPs will sharpen their teeth over impending electoral suicide. His initial moves, slaughtering Blairites to feed public dissatisfaction, will not tackle the structural causes of maladministration. Throwing Hewitt, Jowell or Blears to us will only feed our taste for the fresh blood of sacrificial Labour incompetents.

Syria's Summer War; Iran's Nuclear Winter

Last year, we were diverted from the main show in Iraq by the 'shooting war' in Lebanon, which Israel won from a military stance. Hezbollah does not shoot rockets now. Nevertheless, the political consequences were far greyer. The Arab countries perceived Israeli retaliation to be a sign of weakness rather then strength, since the outcome was not overwhelming, swift and complete. On the other hand, Israel's willingness to use UNIFIL as a filter, avoids troops on the ground entering the meatgrinder of southern Lebanon.

The destabilisation of Lebanon and the waxing of Syria's strength in the short-term has eroded any gains from the pro-Western coalition in the government. Syria continues to support both Hezbollah and Hamas with weaponry and a hinterland for their organisations. Emboldened, the country has also made further demands on the Golan Heights and started to amass forces on the border in a defensive formation.

[Lt-General] Ashkenazi said that Syria was continuing to upgrade its forces on its border with Israel, but that Israel had no information of a planned preemptive strike by Damascus. He reiterated the assessment that this buildup of forces was of a defensive nature

This has been accompanied by a number of threats from the Syrian Ba'athists to retake the Golan Heights by force. On April 16th, the Syrian Information Minister, Mohsen Bilal, threatened mukawama (resistance) - a term that can encompass terrorism or warfare. This enjoined Prime Minister Olmert to state publicly that he did not wish Syria to miscalculate their power and commence a conflict that they could lose.

Israel faces a potential war on three sides: north, south and east: against the Palestinians, the Shi'ite Hezbollah and the Syrians. It will be waged by rockets, terrorism and armed incursions. With the heavier firepower and the threat status, Israel cannot afford to lose, even though it will set back bankrupt peace proposals. Many have interpreted the US build-up in the Gulf as a staging post for an attack on Iran but the primary role could be deterrence in the event of an Israeli-Syrian war. Containment instead of aggression is an appropriate stance, if Iran is to be prevented from taking strong steps to defend its ally. The risks of this strategy is that low-level containment can soon stray into a hot war, with British soldiers in Basra caught in the middle.

Syria's summer wars could result in Iran's nuclear winter.

Basra: Siege Mantality and Broken Morale

Private Paul Barton has spoken of turn. His comments may provide some useful insights into the current experiences of the British Army in Basra but they display no strategic or useful information on Iraq as a whole. They merely confirm that our deployment in Basra has turned into a scuttle.

He confirmed that a "siege mentality" developed amongst the British forces in Basra from January 2007 onwards: as forces were drawn down and Iranian influence increased. Even at this stage, the government could have engaged with reality and cleared the city of militias with appropriate force instead of hiding behind the figleaf of Iraqi security forces taking over.

Pte Barton said in the 18 months between the end of his first tour of Iraq and his return this year the pressure on troops had increased hugely. The "Iranian influence" had given insurgents increasingly powerful and new weaponry, he said.

Pte Barton, a member of the 1st Battalion, the Staffordshire Regiment, said: "The situation has become intolerable. We are meant to be there peacekeeping but there is no peace to keep. There's a civil war going on and we are caught in the middle, coming under attack day and night.

"They are getting access to a lot more weapons, which are also becoming stronger and stronger.

"We're coming into the end game as far as I'm concerned. We're losing around four soldiers a month and it won't get any better.

"They've even started attacking our base at Basra airport now they've got proper artillery guns. Once that's gone there's nowhere left."

Nevertheless, it is not up to soldiers to question the government of the day, unless they have concluded that their superiors and the Mnistry of Defence are incompetent. This is a strong argument in favour of speaking out. The Independent reports that these attitudes and conclusions are prevalent amongst many taking tours of duty of Basra.

Blair's Iraqi war broke Basra, broke his own reputation, and broke the morale of the British soldier. Now he has left the Iranians with nominal control of Iraq's seaport and the Shatt Al-Arab: the preconditions for a hot war in a hot summer.

Libyan liberty and Counter Terror Mess

There is an understanding between the law and the country which it serves. Since the law of the land must maintain an implicit social contract with those who obey it, rationality and liberty must be its watchwords. Otherwise, the law will be attacked for arbitrary decisions that undermine these values. Who would undertake such a predictable attack when two individuals deemed to be a danger to national security are set free. Step forward, Home Secretary, John Reid.

Two Libyan suspects were due to be deported to Libya under a Memorandum of Understanding with the Gaddafi regime. After they challenged the deportation orders in court, the Libyans won their case on the grounds that arab dictators have a nasty habit of torturing those identified as enemies. The case was won correctly since deportation with the potential for torture is immoral. However, we come to the more difficult, some may say lunatic, decision.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) allowed the appeals by DD and another man, AS, granting them bail in principle under strict conditions, including a daily 12-hour curfew.

The Home Office opposed bail on the grounds they would abscond if let out of Long Lartin maximum security prison, where they have been under immigration detention.

However, Siac Judge Mr Justice Mitting said keeping them in detention after they had won their appeal would be on the "cusp of legality".

If these two defendants are a danger to national security as the government has alleged, the "cusp of legality" would prudently determine that they should stay under lock and key until the appeal is heard or they have been charged, tried and found guilty. The whole episode demonstrates that there is a gap between investigation and prosecution, which the government tried to bridge through control orders, house arrest and deportation to torture. The Home Office is confident that they are guilty of something, but are unwilling to submit their evidence to the burden of proof required by a trial.

Hence, the current mess in counter-terrorist operations, exacerbated by suspicious judges and politically exploitive Ministers, will continue to release suspects who have connections or who have taken part in terrorist and extremist activities. A proper court system will demand rigorous evidence rather than innuendo, hearsay and references to a map of a Birmingham flightpath, leaked to reinforce notions of guilt.

Afghanistan: Pakistan and the Taliban 'Surge'

Richard May, writing for the Center for Defense Information, argues that the 'spring offensive' of the Taliban will target the weaker European nations with troops in Afghanistan. These countries do not have the staying power to take casualties and will withdraw, giving Islamist propaganda another victory over the 'soft power'.

Most likely, we will see much less of a unified offensive than singular attacks that seek to break the will and morale of the coalition forces.

These small-scale attacks, a page right out of the book on insurgency in Iraq, will not seek to push Western forces out of Afghanistan through force, but instead rely on a slow grind of suicide attacks, road side bombs, kidnappings and random ambushes with the intent of weakening foreign militaries to the point of withdrawal. The Taliban offensive will not form distinct battle lines; they will instead attack multiple points throughout Afghanistan, from the frontier to the interior, to create the image of a pervasive insurrection, shaking confidence in coalition forces, NATO and the government of President Hamid Karzai.

The exchange of tactics and personnel between insurgencies between Iraq and Pakistan does not bode well for the 'Taliban surge' as May argues. He points to recent developments in Waziristan where local tribes picked off foreign fighters, mainly the Uzbeks and, possibly, Al-Qaeda affiliates. He does not identify the continued support and connivance of the Pakistani intelligence service and authorities as a problem. Nor does May reference the running sore of the Durand line: another grievance that Pakistan can use to maintain their support for the insurgency. Let us remember how long they chose to bleed Kashmir.

For instance, in Pakistan, the insurgent’s traditional staging area, the local population is turning against the Taliban and the foreign fighters that stand alongside them. The local tribes of Waziristan are growing tired of external influence and incursion into their homeland. The Taliban is losing its sanctuary in Pakistan and as such, losing its base of support. Without this vital area in Pakistan the insurgency in Afghanistan cannot survive.

That is quite correct. Pakistan is the key to Afghanistan. The continued slow destabilisation of this nuclear power and the increasing influence of those who wish to convert the republic into an emirate does not bold well for the future. Unfortunately for us, the road to Afghan peace lies through Islamabad.

Afghanistan: Hurrah for the Hypocrites!

Let us hear it for the hypocrites! The European Commission has urged Canadian troops to stay in Afghanistan after a vote in the Canadian House of Commons rejected establishing an exit timetable.

Canada received another plea on Tuesday to keep troops in Afghanistan.

"It would be sending a very negative signal if today, for example, one nation, which is seriously involved here, would to decide to call it off and to pull back its troops," Hansjorg Kretschmer, the European Commission ambassador to Afghanistan, told CanWest News Service in an exclusive interview from Kabul.

Kretschmer prefaced his comments by saying he did not want to be involved in Canada's "internal debate," but added: "I think any debate about this, and any decision about this today would certainly be premature because …we all fulfil an important role."

If we look at the bahviour of the "European allies" in more detail, we find that Afghanistan has acquired the same toxic  breath as the European Constitution for two countries in particular.  The Dutch are opposed to their troops doing some good rather than lazing in barracks and emulating their continental counterparts:

Fifty-eight percent of the Dutch public thinks that the Dutch mission in the southern Afghan province of Uruzgan should not be extended, according to a survey of 18,000 people by EenVandaag, or Channel 1 Today, a daily current affairs' show broadcast on Dutch TV channel Nederland 1.

Exactly 50 percent of those surveyed says they oppose the Dutch working in Afghanistan to help stabilize and rebuild the country. The Netherlands has 1,400 troops in Uruzgan on a two-year mission which is due to expire in August 2008.

Two-thirds of respondents do support finishing off the current mission however, despite the first combat-related fatality among the Dutch troops last week.

It took Vietnam and ten years before the United States got sick of bodybags plural. For the Dutch, it only took one. As for the French: the pro-US candidate, Sarkozy, saw no need to worry about some far-away country where French troops could cause unrest at home:

Sarkozy, the governing conservatives' candidate, said he supported outgoing President Jacques Chirac's decision to pull 200 French special forces out of Afghanistan late last year. He said he would continue that policy if elected in the May 6 runoff vote. Some 1,100 French soldiers are currently part of a NATO force in Afghanistan.

"The long-term presence of French troops in that part of the world does not look definitive to me," he said in an interview with France-2 television.

That is why this gives me great pleasure in saying that the long-term future of France does not look definitive to me.

The parallels between Afghanistan and the European Constitution in these two countries is indicative of two separate factors: volatile unrest against increased centralisation from Brussels and a soft Islamisation of foreign policy as Muslim voters are wooed and feared.

Private and Public Endeavours on E-voting and Electoral Theft

Thames Valley have released some information on how they would deal with electoral fraud in the up and coming elections. This is an important issue due to the opportunities provided by text voting, e-voting and postal voting. Taking these matters seriously, the Thames Valley constabulary is in close contact with returning officers and any complaints are referred to the economic crimes unit. This is probably a similar procedure for other constabularies throughout Britain.

Reinforcing the police procedural route for post-electoral fraud is the monitoring of the OpenRights Group. Although their role is not mandated by law, they have requested monitoring rights to assess counts under electronic voting systems, given the possibility of fraud and error.  Their findings will be submitted to the Electoral Commission.

In the current round of voting, there will be electronic identification of postal votes and automatic counting in Scotland. Voters may also use the internet and the telephone. However, new identification requirements have already caused potential delays in Norfolk:

Under close watch this election season will be software used to verify ballots from postal voting, which will be used across England and Wales. Once voters are registered, they can cast their votes and send the ballot through the mail. Postal voting is seen as a way to make it easier for people to participate in elections but has been criticized as susceptible to fraud.

                  

This year, special equipment, called postal vote identifiers, will be used to compare a voter's signature on the voter registration form and the signature on the ballot as well as the voter's birth date. The DCA has allotted up to £12.2 million ($24.4 million) for the equipment. One of the vendors is Northgate Information Solutions PLC, which is providing equipment for 75 local authorities.

                  

However, concerns have been raised over the accuracy and speed of the equipment. A DCA spokesman said if a postal vote identifier detects anomalies between signatures, the ballot will be reviewed by an election official.

                  

This year for the first time Scotland will replace manual counting with electronic counting, which it says will produce results by the next afternoon after the election. The e-counting services will be provided by DRS Data Service, the United Kingdom's only e-counting software vendor.

Despite the potential problems, YouGov have confirmed that e-voting is popular, as it may increase turnout. Without access to the full data, it is not possible to guage whether e-voting became less popular when the issue of fraud was raised. However, these new trials may well reduce the potential for electoral fraud as councillors and communities may be ignorant of how these systems can be gamed. E-voting may be potentially more fraudulent but only if you know how to do it. As always, knowledge is the key.

Get Rid of Reid

Now I am worried. The division of the Home Office is necessary for John Reid to think and care for us:

Mr Reid's warning of the "devastating consequences" of cyber terrorism came as he said the reshaping of the Home Office would enable him to "wake up and think about the security of the nation first and foremost every morning".

This implies that Mr Reid does not do this now. Although he is very busy telling us the dreadful risks that demand we do everything he says, or face the prospect of disaster. He did not say what he was doing about the prospect of cyber-terrorism though I may do him a disservice here, but he certainly gave the impression that it existed, and that it could do dreadful things. But do not fear, Reid is here, and getting up:

Mr Reid admitted that "scaring people does not produce security". He said the public, business and the government had to work together to protect the national infrastructure.

The "pace, scale and intensity of innovation our adversaries are capable of allows no room for complacency."

Mr Reid did not tell us why huge database projects, linking large amounts of information and vulnerable to such attacks, were favoured by his government. He did not tell us why Labour's plans make us more vulnerable to cyber-terrorism. He did tell us that he will be thinking about it over a bowl of cereal. And he did tell us about what could happen, so that we can put our minds at rest.

Another reason for England to gain independence and leave the Celtic nations as the Bastard fringe: getting rid of Reid.

Miliband's Green Sweep is Labour's Landfill

David Miliband was right not to seek a candidacy for the leadership of the Labour Party. His latest idea demonstrates that he would have been as unpopular as Brown after a short while: using higher taxes to gouge money out of the middle classes, using the excuse that they needed to change behaviour. This should be a wise lesson to David Cameron that environmental policies are tolerated so long as they do not cost.

Under the new Climate Change Bill, households will be charged more if their waste is higher than allowed, and may earn a rebate on their council tax, if they recycle more. It is  easy to note that the charge sticks whilst the rebate is only a possibility, and may be  achieved: probably after filling some complicated form in after waiting months to obtain the necessary information from the local council. Then you find that your time limit for claiming back has run out and it was all a wasted effort.

With the council elections looming, many locally elected officials wish to play down this 'double-charging' aspect of rubbish collection, and soem actually voice the attitudes of their constituents:

Council leaders are divided about the benefits of rubbish charges. Warren Bradley, leader of Liverpool City Council which is facing elections next week said: “This would not be a good idea. People already pay for their waste collection through council tax. This is like using a hammer to crack a nut. I am surprised by this proposal and Liverpool City Council will definitely not be introducing anything like this.”

Alan Connett, leader of Teignbridge District Council, which is reverting from fortnightly to weekly collection, said: “I think people pay their council tax and expect a minimum standard as part of the service, which is something we ought to provide. Otherwise, what are they paying their council tax for?

That is a very good question, Mr Connett. Most people are paying more for less, and Miliband's new levy will not impress..His green sweep would result in a Tory clean sweep.

Undermining Domestic Defences

The government has again been found wanting in its duties. Surprised by the speech of Peter Clarke, Deputy Assistant Commissioner for the Metropolitan Police, in which he accused unnamed sources of jeopardising counter-terrorist operations, the executive refused to hold an inquiry, after both opposition parties tried to hold them to account. Clarke's speech also proves that the police force is concerned that certain parties are now undermining counter-terrorist activities. This frustration may have been reinforced by the attacks on Assistant Commissoner Yates over the 'cash for peerages' scandal.

The government's response has been inadequate and has handed the Tories with another victory.

At Prime Minister's questions in the Commons, David Cameron called on Mr Blair to set up an immediate inquiry and asked for assurances that no minister, civil servant or special advisor leaked the information.

Mr Blair said as far as he was aware they did not and he brushed aside the call for an inquiry.

Mr Cameron told Mr Blair: "If you don't have a leak inquiry, how on earth can you know?"

Mr Blair criticised Mr Cameron for his suggestion that members of the government were responsible, and challenged the Tory leader to produce any evidence he had to back up his allegation.

The history of this government concerns the primary of politics and spin over all other concerns. Ten years of Blairite government has demonstrated their unusual combination of arrogance and weakness, rejecting demands one week, and acceding to full and open inquiries the next. These fickle responses may usually depend solely upon Blair's own confidence. In his current incarnation, robustness has returned, bolstered by the near departure experience that he may or may not realise.

How does this impact upon our counter-terrorist activities? The answer is that it probably does not alter the methods undertaken to combat potential attacks and obtain intelligence on domestic threats. Where it does shed some light is the fraught relationship between politicians and the police. Whilst this has not compromised our defences so far, Clarke's whistleblowing shows that New Labour spin handicaps counter-terrorism. On emore reason for their removal.