Time To End The 'Special Relationship'

It took a report by the "Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee" to conclude what we all knew already. That for Britain it's more a "special friendship", where one partner gets to see other people, have no commitment and yet call up for a bootie call. It's amazing it took a committee to conclude that.

What made the "Special Relationship" work was Britain's relationship with the rest of the world and the rest of the world's belief that Britain would council America not to do stupid things. Blair destroyed that position giving support to Bush, he made Britain a lap dog in the eye's of the world. In doing that he undermined what made the "Special Relationship" work. He made it just a term that people snigger at.

At least we won't hopefully have to hear all about the "Special Relationship" any more, while watching MPs falling over themselves, grinning like a manic and repeating creepily the declaration that they're special, so very special, over and over again like Gollum without a comb over.

Five Days Later . . . . . .

Brown comments on the reception Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi received in Libya. This is going to be another "sorry" situation, he will say anything to not say something that even resembles an answer.

Afghanistan Mission - British Troops

In light of the tragic rise in British deaths, Afghanistan has moved back into the headlines. Questions surrounding equipment and the mission's point are being raised. The government have said that troops are on the offensive, the Taliban will be defeated and they are well equipped. I can't judge if that's true, though the mission's point and plan does raise serious questions.

Armies by their nature are a destructive force and sometimes you do need to destroy, yet you need a constructive force to, they speak of destroying the Taliban, but what gets built after that? When you are fighting an ideology, you don't just destroy it by killing people. It's Afghanistan's government that will be the constructive force here, as it will be the state that controls the army, schools, police and hospitals. It is the state who will create an ideology for people to believe in. An army alone can never do that.

David Miliband has defended the UK military presence saying Afghanistan is "a launch pad for attacks" by terrorists. 7/7 was perpetrated by British Muslims, terrorists don't need to go to Afghanistan to launch an attack. Our foreign policy always has and always will effect terrorism within our shore lines, just as our national policy does. This never was, nor will it be, the Waterloo of terrorism, it's wrong to portray it as such.

People often compare the conflict in the Middle East to the Second World War, though I disagree with the parallel, there is something to learn from it. The allies never just focused on the conflict, but had a narrative, a start, middle and end plan. We have become entrenched in Afghanistan and we will never be able to leave if our plan doesn't include doing so. This conflict will just become Vietnam, though I could say it's already becoming that. There's still a prospect of something constructive coming from this, if the plan wasn't so destructive driven.

David Davies Calls Government on Torture

David Davis in a statement to the House of Commons last night said that the intelligence services had been "outsourcing torture". He stated information that previously had been suppressed through the process of secret court hearings, putting it into the public domain in the way this government have constantly tried to stop. His statement was about the case of Rangzieb Ahmed:

Rangzieb Ahmed should have been arrested by the UK in 2006, but he was not. The authorities knew that he intended to travel to Pakistan, so they should have prevented that; instead, they suggested that the ISI arrest him. They knew that he would be tortured, and they arranged to construct a list of questions and supply it to the ISI.

Rangzieb Ahmed is a convicted terrorist, I in no way, shape or form defend that. Yet the dismissive rhetorical surrounding this that he deserved to be tortured is disgraceful. It's not about revenge, tic for tac or who's better at torture, it's about doing what's right. It was right to convict him using the law, it was not right to outsource torture and jeopardize the prosecution in doing so. No evidence gained under torture is admissible in a British court, in fact in any court who's country signed the Geneva Convention.

It's easy to be reactionary about terrorists, but I rather Britain didn't become no better than them. I don't want to live in a bomb scared waste land any more than an idealogical equivalent of that. I welcome Davies calls for an inquiry as we need to address this, it has a huge effect on how we use intelligence, address terrorism and our foreign policy. Pretending otherwise helps no one.


The Guardian have over viewed what is know about Britain's role to date, for those unfamiliar with the story.

Iran and British Government Reaction

The government's foreign policy makes me despair, I dread them giving a response to international situations, which consistently is just a reaction to events. Iran has been no different.

Their supreme leader calls Britain "Evil" and the government react like it's a "Yo Mama" insult. They've now topped this when today Iran ordered two UK diplomats to leave the country, Brown responds by expelling two Iranian diplomats from Britain. A tic for tac foreign policy, wonderful, I'm sure it won't be used as propaganda in Iran, nor isolate them further. When someone is picking a fight there are times to keep quiet in order not to escalate things, this is one them.

The protesters are being called terrorists and traitors, giving the Iranian government any means to reduce or discredit their message is not helpful to their plight. Particularly since Britain and the US are perceived to have rigged elections in Iran before. It is possible to support the Iranian people and the principles of democracy without, counter-productively, involving ourselves directly in an internal political struggle. As the out come of this situation has to be resolved by the Iranians, otherwise it will have no legitimacy, politics and religion are too intertwined in Iran.

It is just unbelievably ironic that when the government shouldn't have followed America's lead in the Middle East they did, now they should they don't.