The Bewilderness

Not rational

Putin has stated that the United States was the prime cause of the war and the continued occupation of Georgia. Hmmm. Someone has been following the drivel of the left in Europe, who view all international policy through an anti-American prism. This is "not rational" and Putin broadcasts the garbage to reinforce Russia's role as an alternative to the United States. The ideas are not rational but Putin certainly is.

Describing the rot

It is not a surprise to learn that the Army has more officers than required, fewer soldiers than needed and failing recruitment. This corroborates the arguments of Lewis Page that the mismanagement of our armed forces has led to a pork-barrel ministry with some professional forces on the side. Page is excellent on the long-term damage caused by the current structure of the armed forces but the present rot has been exacerbated by the two wars.

The MoD failed to provide detailed figures on the numbers of soldiers quitting the Army, but commanders are known to be concerned about the departure of many experienced soldiers and non-commissioned officers.

Such personnel, usually in their late 20s and 30s, are regarded as the backbone of the Army, but many are departing because of the strain that repeated deployments place on their family lives.

The Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force both have small shortages of both officers and other ranks.

Bob Ainsworth, a defence minister, admitted that important military personnel are being lured back to civilian life.

The Conservatives will face a strong need to rebuild the armed forces especially as the present government talks aggressively and deploys our troops without regard to the needs or morale of the armed forces. Talk about rearmament becomes easier following the unilateral recognition of the separatist regions and Russia's unwillingness to abide by diplomatic compromise.

Half empty

A warning against lists

Dave Freeman, the co-author of best-selling travel guide "100 Things to Do Before You Die" has died aged 47, before completing his irreverent list.

Mr Freeman had managed to tick off around 50 of the adventures recommended by his book, including land-diving on the Pacific island of Vanuatu and running with the bulls in Pamplona, Spain.

The glass is half empty.

Turning down

Jeff Randall of the Telegraph notes the two trends that will now eat away at Labour's hopes of an economic recovery: falling living standards and rising unemployment. It is the economy, but it is vicious and toxic to Labour's poll ratings. As the downturn begins to take effect, anecdotal evidence is pointing to a rise in unemployment:

In case you missed Monday's news - you probably had better things to do on a bank holiday than trawl through the business press - allow me to pass on a report in The Financial Times: employment lawyers and legal helplines are experiencing a sharp rise in businesses seeking advice on how to sack staff. Ding dong! This is your wake-up call. The final piece in the jigsaw of gloom is about to drop into place.

The British Chambers of Commerce, which has been more alert than rival employers' groups to Mr Brown's mismanagement of the economy, predicts up to 300,000 fresh job losses. It sees unemployment breaking through the 2m mark if conditions continue to deteriorate.

With the downturn bloodier and less predictable than expected, we should anticipate unemeployment to rise more quickly than predicted. The bets on this recession have been one way so far.

Neutrality, aggression, two orders?

With the recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the continued occupation of Georgia and an unwillingness to show any restraint, Russia seems resolved to use brinkmanship to achieve its aims. Listening to Newsnight, one can hear the pro-Russian narrative of the BBC: the conflict is a contest of rivals between the United States and Russia, and the right to redraw the map of Georgia is based upon the earlier abandonment of international law with the invasion of Iraq and the independence of Kosovo.

This narrative does not do real justice to the aggression of Russia in ethnically cleansing Georgian territory and using pathetic propaganda to justify its dismemberment of the country. Partition can be an appropriate tool if all parties agree, but the secession of the two territories has merely prolonged this conflict for another decade. Russia indulges in a restoration of its influence in the Near Abroad but will find that this act of aggression narrows its ability to defend its interests.

This is a real test of the West and may allow the cards to fall in two ways. We hear much rhetorical condemnation but little resistance. The divisions have shown that the flaws of the current security structure now contribute to western weakness: no member of NATO is willing to test Article 5, since when a member is invaded, there is a possibility that there will be no response. Once that occurs, NATO is dead. How many European countries would go to war if Russia forced a corridor through Lithuania to Kaliningrad: watch those who accommodate and those who resist. Whether than takes place 'by invitation' or by demand from disenfranchised Russian minorities, is it nightmarish to imagine a truncated European Union where Russian client states enjoy second class status whilst Mitteleuropa enjoys neutrality and greater influence?

Whether the echoes of the great song of war drum in the ears of some analysts and Soviet pasts filter through the debate, it is too early to slip towards a limited war. Gung ho gangbangs are unhelpful if they are not backed up by the gun. The summitry and talking heads of western pols are another reminder that the West is decayed - and that no union of democracies or talk of law will overcome the desiccated shrouds, soon to be coloured with the strong strokes of alliance or neutrality.

The young watched, the old left to die - Nulab's way of life and death

Two small developments that indicate the plans that the government wishes to put in place. The new database that is mandated to carry details of all children will now be used to prosecute as well as protect. This small extension of the original purpose of the Centrepoint database was buried in the guidance. Security is a secondary issue as 300,000 public sector personnel will have access to the database, leaving the entire project open to abuse.

Labour's open goal is a policy endeavour, mandated from the top. The other development is the distortion caused by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in the political economy of the National Health Service. Political as all socialisation is political, and political as lives and deaths are decided by a bureaucrat's whims. This is caused by the penal treatment meted out to those who wish to partially pay for their own costs. To avoid distress, surgeons now avoid talking about new treatments as NICE can take two years to agree a treatment, whilst local Primary Care Trusts decide access to drugs on the basis of cost. As the real 'postcode lottery' savages cancer management, the ill are free to die at the point of use.

One faith fights its rivals

The rejection of the Lisbon Treaty has led to debate in Eire as they adjust to their new position on the periphery. Despite the arguments from some Eurosceptics such as Dan Hannan that they will package the whole Treaty as an annex to the next enlargement, this seems an option that is viewed with some caution. After all, they would be providing final confirmation that the European Union is unable to affirm any democratic credentials.

Debate in Ireland has adopted some strange paths, structured by its past as a confessional state. The Irish cardinal, Sean Brady, follows in the path of his outspoken brethren in the United Kingdom by opining publicly and then places the blame squarely upon the secularist agenda of the EU. This may or may not be the case and I am sure that the final result was more complex than a kulturkampf. Nevertheless, a welcome outburst to ensure that people of faith look at Europe with a juandiced eye.

According to Cardinal Sean Brady, the country's most senior Roman Catholic churchman, the answer may be the EU's perceived hostility to religion.

 

Addressing the Humbert summer school in the west of the country on Sunday, Brady, Primate of All-Ireland, said the referendum result said, "At least some of those who were previously enthusiastic about the founding aims of the EU, both social and economic, are now expressing unease."

 

"Successive decisions ... have undermined the family based on marriage, the right to life from the moment of conception, to natural death, the sacredness of the Sabbath, the right of Christian institutions to maintain and promote their ethos," he added. "These and other decisions have made it more difficult for committed Christians to maintain their instinctive commitment to the European project."

The cardinal has confirmed that the European Union is promoting a particular cultural and moral monad that is beginning to alienate more than one constituency. If your vote counts for nought and regulation that undermines your beliefs cannot be reversed, then it is a step away from civil disobedience and illegal resistance. The European Union is not a liberal and democratic institution. The gradual centralisation has begun to impact upon personal spheres in culture, religion and belief. One faith has begun to fight its rivals.

This can only deepen the alienation that political elites engender with their contempt for the political will of their electorates: already, we have a further call for a second Irish referendum. If this is not carried out and finished by 2010, the Commission is aware that a Tory government in the United Kingdom will put paid to Lisbon for ever.

Man's inhumanity to Taliban

Lynne Doucet, talking at the Edinburgh International Television Conference, gave a speech on the complexities of reporting in Afghanistan. She lamented that she was unable to convey the complexities of the conflict or the perspective of the Taliban factions. Whilst some may view this as a criticism of television reporting in general, snippets of her speech show the quest for impartiality. Let us consider what she says within that framework.

Doucet wishes to show the motives and perceptions of the Afghan population, yet uses the term Taliban rather than Afghan: her true target is those who resist, not those who support:

"What's lacking in the coverage of the Afghans is the sense of the humanity of the Afghans.

"In the Prince Harry coverage for example, there were all these people out there you never really saw them.

"You knew that the bombs were dropping in that direction and the guns pointing in that direction but you never got a sense of how Afghans are as a people."

In further detail, she notes the factionalism of the Taliban, yet does not move beyond her original goal of giving the opponents a voice or conveying their 'humanity'. Doucet understands that part of her moral mission is to explain the complexities of the conflict, but her method is to give the mic to the other side.

Her impartiality is already flawed by her admission that journalists in Afghanistan support the troops through coverage of the Prince Harry mission:

Canadian-born Doucet said: "It probably did bring a lot of people to think about Afghanistan who normally wouldn't ordinarily think about Afghanistan. If the Prince Harry story can bring more people to think about Afghanistan then that's a good thing.

"There was a lost opportunity. There was hardly any mention of Afghans, even of Afghanistan ... (just a) sense of 'I went to a country far away'.

But she added: "Viewing figures went up, Prince Harry got a hero's welcome and recruitment for the British Army went up so an objective was achieved. Did that mean people knew more about why Britain was there? I don't think so.

Doucet wishes to be the gatekeeper for explaining the conflict: living up to her perceived concept of impartiality by maintaining a position of neutrality and providing access to all parties fighting in Afghanistan. But her freedom to report is bounded by the protection that the Western forces provide: the Taliban would neither respect her as a woman or as a non-Muslim. Without this understanding of her own limited freedom of movement, she is unable to provide a rounded understanding of the limits to reporting in Afghanistan.

Journalists find that they are unable to report voices where values are incommensurable and their own position is at risk, since they are viewed as the enemy. Underneath all the verbiage, Doucet's unspoken lament is that the Taliban consider her the enemy too, when all she wishes to do is understand them. Poor lamb.

We need a babel of Borisii to drown out one

Boris bounded up the steps like some hulking bear before looking out of place in front of cameras, Chinese and  dignitaries. Unable to believe his luck, all dignity fled as he waved into the crowd like some starstruck teenager in front of the camera who just spots his parents: personal trumping political. One can imagine his delight in the spotlight, representing London and attracting all the attention. Did he indulge in cliche: "I could get used to this"....

Watching Boris and waiting for an air of excitement, the media must be appalled. There have been resignations and a twitch of insurgency about his administration, but they look in vain for vision, narrative or overarching change. Boris is patiently and humbly finding his feet, avoiding expectations of the first hundred days or new brooms. Bored by this lack of activity, commentators latch onto division, another area that Cameron needs to be relaxed about.

John Rentoul notes that Boris is adopting the lines of a man in office. This is at variance with the criticism demanded of opposition. An opposition leader will talk of a broken society, a mayor in office will dismiss such a phrase. From this break, Boris and media build up his persona, tease out his ambitions and fulfil talk of future office. This is all to the good.

Johnson, on the other hand, looks a little further to the future, after one or two solid terms as leader of a world city that is home to one eighth of the UK population. His route to Downing Street would be new to British politics, but is familiar in other countries. Jacques Chirac was mayor of Paris, for example, and many German leaders cut their teeth in state governments.

Whatever transitory fame the Olympics give to Boris, this should not detract from the advantages of devolving power. This allows more to wield power at a local level, crafting policies and measures that suit their electorates. Where such decentralisation has taken effect, these platforms become the key to national leadership. Mayors, state governors and perhaps, the heads of devolved Parliaments in the constituent countries of the United Kingdom will be viewed as launching platforms for the premiership.

Whilst there is only one devolved position in England, we will see a debate on the relationship between the London Mayor and the Prime Minister, if the two are seen as potential candidates for the same job. Cameron should not view this current gossip as a problem for localism. If he wishes to drown Boris out or neuter his profile, then the babel of a thousand mayors and county leaders wielding real powers should drown him out. (A real thorn would be ensuring that the Chief Constable if the Metropolitan Police is elected, rather than appointed). That would not be "piffle".

NATO: the mouse that bored

If earlier dates are not identified for the final impotence of NATO, then this summit may be the one. The United States was unable to forge a consensus amongst NATO to suspend relations with Russia and expedite Georgia's membership. Was this a testament to a lack of diplomatic preparation or a willingness by the Bush administration to tarnish NATO's reputation and embarrass European pretentions. The Russians decided that the result, a NATO-Georgia Council, was a pathetic end to the summit and have proceeded to dig in, pissing upon further diplomatic efforts.

By avoiding a divided result, NATO was europeanised with a bland unity that reinforced the perception of impotence. The continentals were unwilling to take a firm stand against Russia for its atrocities, especially when the less democratic states are pro-Putin. The vague platitude sat well at a European Union summit and may have finally persuaded the United States that NATO is no longer a suitable vehicle for strategic defence.

Brown was so unwilling to countance a stand, that he dithered both ways: voted with the EU at the summit and sent Miliband to ape Cameron in Tbilisi and display backbone, after refusing to take any concrete steps to defend the stricken republic. Another shop soiled PR stunt, joining the 'Sarkozy ceasefire' and the profound silences.

If NATO's paper is no longer worth the mutual defence, then its devalued membership can be extended, safe in the knowledge that no member will leap to help those who border Russia. The Baltic states must ponder how secure they are, when certain powers in Europe are willing to accept Russia's influence over proxy states that could become stalking horses within the very houses of the West.

It is time that Britain weighed the alternatives to an alliance that no longer guarantees our safety and compromises our freedom of action.