The Bewilderness

Thanks to Political Correctness...

Following car bombs in London on Friday morning, and an attack at Glasgow airport this afternoon, we can safely say this has not been a good weekend.

This story about a car driving into a group on Saturday morning might be a third jihadist attack.

Thanks to political correctness, there is no description of the attacker, or of the victims.  Now, time for a thought experiment.  Imagine someone wants to start a riot.  Were she to imply that this is work of a racial group with a grudge, how would she be refuted?

The Uravelling European "Constitution"

There is some good news on the pressures that may drive Gordon Brown down the road towards a referendum on the new European "constitution", symbols to be added later. The Republic of Ireland already intends to hold a referendum and there is pressure from the Netherlands to follow this example.

There was bad news yesterday for Mr Brown when the leader of the parliamentary Dutch Labour Party, the second biggest party in the government coalition, came out in favour of a referendum.

Jacques Tichelaar, a supporter of the new treaty, suggested that as the deal was so good, a vote should not be feared. "You shouldn't be afraid to put this to the people. I don't see a single argument for not holding a referendum," he said.

If Labour MPs in the Dutch parliament back a referendum then it will be difficult for Jan Peter Balkenende, the prime minister, to resist.

More problematic for the deal that was agreed by Tony Blair at the European Council is the demand that Poland receive more concessions on the amending treaty. Their concerns over the double majority voting treaty is now dealt with by asking for the powers from two member states to delay measures by two years, a moderate measure that could increase accountability and strengthen national interest. Watch the Europhiles shriek and dance like ants frying under a microscope. Their predictable Pavlovian behaviour will be scrutinised in future years for the turning point where Europe moved from liberal democracy to this form of authoritarian oligarchy.

The European Commission responded furiously. “This was clearly settled at the European Council last week,” a spokesman said. “A mandate is a mandate and a deal is a deal. Now it is time for IGC to finish its job.”

This is the language that reveals the real Europe: deals done by elites that are binding, without ratification by Parliaments or people. No deal is done until legally agreed by the Parliaments of the Member States, the last time that this will take place. If this is passed, the Commission will only have to deal with the European Council and the European Parliament for treaty amendments.

How galling that their deal is beginning to unravel.

Brown's Marquis

When one views the construction of the cabinet of "all the talents", with the appointment of Sir Digby Jones, Mark Malloch Brown and Lord Stevens, we hear the same opening of the key political institutions to outsiders that Sarkozy has championed in France. Both Brown and Sarkozy wished to use outsider appointments as signals of their willingness to seek expertise and competence outside their political parties.

These appointments can usefully help the representation of the incumbent government. Sarkozy has used the appointments of women, ethnic minorities and Bernard Kouchner, founder of Medicins sans frontieres, to undermine the right wing image that he cultivated as a hammer of the banlieues. This is less important for Brown, although Unionist defence is a factor in his thinking.

Brown also wished to emulate and undermine David Cameron, the leader of the Conservative Party. He did this, in one way, by fishing in the same pool of talking heads that had acquired a public reputation for straight talking and practical advice in their respective specialisms. The best example of this is Lord Stevens:

Gordon Brown has appointed Lord Stevens, the head of a Conservative party policing taskforce, to be his adviser on international security issues.

The new prime minister's decision to invite the former Metropolitan police chief to join the Labour administration - just weeks after the Conservatives announced the crossbench peer had agreed to head their taskforce on UK border policing - is likely to be seen as provocative by the Tory leader, David Cameron.

The danger of publicising such outside appointments and drawing them into the political tent is that they can backfire. When Blair appointed Frank Field as a signal of radical welfare reform, the sacking of the MP was taken as the closure of that government's willingness to contemplate unprecedented reform. Cameron, by retaining outsiders in policy groups rather than within the party, benefits from their association, without risking political fallout within the party.

If these appointments do not work out, they may signal the time when Brown is perceived as failing to deal with international security or trade, if Stevens or Jones were to resign.

Brown's Referendum

Peter Riddell describes the treaty as a "messy series of compromises" which proves less contentious than earlier treaties. This is understandable when most powers have already been ceded to the EU, and the outcome is a legal entity in all but name. The de facto trappings of nationhood can be added later, since symbolism will emerge from the substance.

The problem for Brown is that Blair may have defused a problem or passed a timebomb. The promise of a referendum on a Constitution is deflected by the argument that this is an amending treaty. Yet, the spun four red lines are now wispy figleaves, autumnal droppings from the withering of British sovereignty. Moreover, the Parliamentary debates will expose the whole treaty to continued reminders of promises betrayed and the impotence of Parliament.

Brown's line of change and honesty will fall at the first hurdle if he maintains the Blairite charge of reneging on a promise given. There may be charges of opportunism and hypocrisy laid against the conservatives, yet this will not be spun as a Eurosceptic move. Giving the people a say is holding the government to the promise that they kept and arguments against the referendum now are bunkum designed to avoid an unpromising outcome. Europhiles do not have the courage to take their arguments to the people.

This gives the Liberal Democrats a key role. Their choice of a referendum or parliamentary vote will potentially swing political influence in favour of the poll. We may see Brown woo the Liberal Democrats further with various forms of co-operation in order to try and sideline the Tories, with the price of acquiescence on this explosive of issues. Europe can sink all parties.

The Taliban discards territory for terror

The Taliban may be involved in a wider skein of attacks across southern and eastern Afghanistan, leading to the current tit-for-tat over territory.

Afghan forces supported by NATO troops took control of Kandahar province’s Ghorak district from Taliban rebels Sunday night after fierce gunbattles that left some Taliban casualties, said provincial Gov. Asadullah Khalid.

The Defence Ministry said three Afghan soldiers were killed in the operation and 11 wounded. Troops have set up checkpoints and were conducting regular patrols in the area, it said.

It was not clear how long the Taliban had controlled the district, but insurgents in contested areas of the south frequently attack villages and drive police out for a few hours or days. Police reinforcements later return with support from foreign troops to retake the area.

In parallels with Iraq, the insurgents will strike against the weaker security forces and drive them out, before facing the superior NATO or coalition forces. The Taliban are reluctant to attack and secure territory for long periods, and have developed a taste for chaos and terrorism.

Another disturbing parallel with Iraq is the influx of Arab jihadists, now numbered in the low hundreds. The links between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda are now re-emerging again, and this marks a further withering of the Taliban's aim for displacing the Karzai government. They have moved from a replacement for the western proxy to a terrorist jihad that no longer has the capability to hold territory. By allying with the Arabs, the Taliban no longer aim for popular support from Afghanistan.

Who would have thought that a large blip in the number of visitors to this website could be occasioned by a post on portable bathroom alternatives.

The coronation of a cabinet-maker

The Labour party had an election that was too close to call. The result, announced at the same time as the coronation, was a triumph for Harriet Harman. Whilst Hilary Benn and Alan Johnson hogged the headlines, the Minister for Justice, acquired the necessary preferences.

This was not the outcome that Gordon Brown preferred. His speech, upon taking the role of Labour leader, was to call upon the handpicked multitudes to prepare for a general election.

Mr Brown said that he wanted to ensure that "we are ready not just to fight but to win a general election".

Now, the new leader is facing some positive press coverage, as if the wooing of the Liberal Democrats in a "cabinet of all the talents" was some ploy to dispossess the third party. As if by mentioning the general election, and hearing of Cameron's minor woes, Brown sets sail for victory.

If this is a honeymoon period, then it will not last long. The continuities with Blair, the problems of Labour's governance and the dilemma posed by the demands for a referendum will overshadow the trite acceptance of the new. We have to wait till Wednesday for announcements from the cabinet-maker.

Fulton Report published

The report into the fiasco earlier this year will not be published for operational reasons. It has been compiled by Lieutenant-General Sir Rob Fulton and recommends new specialist teams designed for these operations. The sailors had not trained together although they had training on these boardings on an individual basis.

Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, the First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff yesterday admitted that it had been “a bad day in the Royal Navy’s 400-year history”. But no one was blaming the 15 boarding-party members for surrendering to the Iranians.

General Fulton concluded that the events of March 23 were “not the result of a single gross failing or individual human error, but of the coming together of a series of vulnerabilities” which had placed the British personnel “in a position that could be exploited through a deliberate act by an unpredictable foreign power”.

Mr Browne said that General Fulton’s conclusions suggested that there was no case for disciplinary action against any of the individuals involved. “But his report does emphasise that many of those individuals could have done more to prevent what happened,” he told the Commons.

Whilst recognising that vulnerabilities may arise, there is disappointment with a report that does not address the singular lack of a naval ethos. This was the most destructive outcome of the incident. The Royal Navy needs to re-examine the mores and practices enjoyed by its seamen.

"They dig their trenches before they go the wire"

Jose Barroso is the President of the European Commission and is not an elected politician, though he was one in the past, like all appointed Commissioners. Tonight, according to the BBC, he stated that no Member State should block the completion of treaty negotiations as this was "not in their interest". This is a rather one-sided view of the meeting, and Barroso argues that the politicians should agree upon the proposed agreement, since this furthers the construction of Europe. The key contribution from the Commission is consensus not conflict or majoritarian rule. He quite specifically referred to redlines and vetoes as counterproductive, since their existence would prevent the completion of a deal.

Just as the Polish and the British defend their positions, the Commission has weighed in on the side of the 'constitutionalists', the band of ratifiers who are using their majority to bulldoze the text through the Union. The contempt for a particular (=national) interest is manifest:

But Mr Barroso issued a coded warning to Poland, a new EU member, saying newcomers had a responsibility to help bridge divides within the union.

"It will be in their interest for them to show that their membership of the European Union is not making European Union life more difficult but, on the contrary, they are giving more impetus to the European Union," he said.

Are there not shades of the Chiracist quietism that accompanied his contempt for new Europe. Indeed, turn to Euobserver, and this friendly warning is transformed into a veiled threat. The BBC failed to understand the message that Barroso wished to convey or wilfully ignored the import of his speech. Either way, they proved once again the witless contribution of their news department:

Speaking on Tuesday afternoon (19 June), Mr Barroso, who has been banging the drum in favour keeping most of the rejected EU constitution but in a different form, said it was in central and eastern European member states' interests to show that the EU had not been weakened since they joined in 2004 and 2007.

"I believe...it would be in their interest for them to show that their membership of the EU is not making the union's life more difficult," said the commission chief.

He indicated that if the summit, which is "of special significance," were to fail "the mechanisms of coherence in the European Union...the mechanisms of solidarity will naturally be weakened," and there will be a "shadow of mistrust" cast on the EU.

The term "mechanisms" was an apparent reference to the cohesion and solidarity funds which sees billions of euros transferred from EU coffers to less well-off regions in the bloc - new member states are by far the greatest beneficiaries of this type of aid

The Labour position on their declared red lines is slightly clearer tonight. Blair said that if these redlines were kept, then the amending treaty would not require a referendum. As the legal dimension of the EU has often circumvented specific promises, such matters can be treated with scepticism. Nor is it likely that the redlines will be kept - resulting in that dealbreaker, a referendum or some dishonest fudge.

We should be grateful that Blair has set out some clear threshold conditions in his public attempts to manipulate the summit. As he is an extremely poor game player, we can expect that these will not be met.

Barbarian At the Gates

In the early running towards the US Presidential election in 2008, the tactics are as much about establishing a brand, raising money, and acquiring the support of activists.

This election is unusual, since neither the incumbent President nor the Vice-President will be running, and that makes for a much more open contest.  This effect is more dramatic in the Republican party, since the effective leaders of the party are the (deeply unpopular) president, and the congressional leaders who lost control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. 

In short, the conditions are ideal for an unexpected and unfancied candidate to enter the race and genuinely contend.  The man who might do this is Texas Congressman Dr Ron Paul. 

Dr Paul ran for president as Libertarian Party candidate in 1988, and won 0.43% of the vote, but he has also won election to Congress on three occasions when not the incumbent.  When one considers the advantages of the incumbent in US politics, this is a fine record.

More recently, he is registering 1-2% in opinion polls, while running first or second in internet or text message polls after the May 3rd Republican Presidential Debate, and has highly popular Facebook, Myspace and Youtube presences (as discussed here).  As well as these signs of activist support, he is apparently receiving considerable campaign contributions. Of the three goals I mentioned in the first paragraph, only general "brand-awareness" appears to be lacking.

Dr Paul is also accused of not really being a Republican, and the party establishment appears to be acting to sabotage his candidacy.  After all, he is not mainstream, in favour of Habeas Corpus rather than torture, small government rather than large, and in general, disagrees with his party in its current form on almost everything.

Clearly, the best way to weaken him is to reduce his opportunities to reach large audiences. And so, he has not been invited to a debate in Iowa on June 30th.  The press release is dated today.

This is a risky game. I do wonder if the coverage of this step is likely to generate exactly the sort of coverage that the party sought to avoid.