Home > Politics > All

Wednesday 4 November 2009

Cartoons

�Ah, there you are. I must have swept you up with the leaves.�

Pick of the week

Books
Sam Leith
Impossible to dislike

Columnists
Toby Young
Status Anxiety

The Week
James Forsyth
The Tories’ push to scupper President Blair is the highest form of flattery

Politics

Fraser Nelson

Wednesday, 7th January 2009

Fraser Nelson reviews the week in politics

If the Conservatives were in a more assertive mood, they could spell out why this conflict has such implications for British foreign policy. It can be seen as the latest stage in Israel’s proxy war with Iran, which, although a Shiite power, has long been funding and arming Hamas, through which it seeks influence in the Sunni world. Israel is sending a message that it will not tolerate an armed, existential threat growing on its doorstep. And this is precisely what a nuclear Iran would be.

Iran takes an ecumenical approach in its determination to eliminate Israel — hence the alliance with Hamas. And last month a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency showed that Iran is making enriched uranium so quickly that it will have enough for a nuclear bomb by the end of this year. This opens the prospect of nuclear blackmail entering the Islamic fundamentalist equation. But, of course, Israel is likely to act before Iran gets to this stage and is unlikely to wait for a United Nations resolution allowing it to do so.

Little wonder Mr Obama has been so quiet, pleading that he doesn’t take over until 20 January. His campaign was haunted by the prospect of his being tested early in his presidency — and a Middle East conflagration induced by Iran will have been just the scenario he will have wanted least. After the 2001 terrorist attacks, America was joined by Nato in entering Afghanistan. In Iraq two years later, it was a coalition of the willing. But if President Obama is sucked into war, which allies will he be able to count on?

The European Union is in the process of unwittingly disqualifying itself, its attempts at a co-ordinated diplomatic mission descending into predictable farce. The Czechs supposedly leading the EU presidency are sympathetic, and defended Israel’s ground attack as a ‘defensive, not offensive move’. This infuriated the French, who saw it as a ‘dangerous military escalation’ and forced a retraction of the Czech statement. It was a typical EU pantomime, demonstrating the futility of pretending 27 nation states can have the same opinion about Israel, or any other thorny foreign policy question.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 Next page

More articles from: Fraser Nelson | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (4)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Expat 44

January 9th, 2009 6:11am Report this comment

From Expat 44

Fraser Nelson's real contribution is hidden in the fine print at the end of his thoughtful analysis.

The British Defence Budget has actually been cut in real terms during the years of Brown's control of the national finances. And cut very seriously.

That is because the inflation in the costs of defence eqwipment has far outstripped the Government and Civil Service's claims that "more money has been allocated." It has: but nothing like the amount squandered on social spending.

That leaves the tough choice spotted by Mr Nelson - aircraft carriers or armoured rovers? Typhoon fighters or tin hats?

It is not a question for the MoD. As long as the Services have to compete for the same pot of gold there will be no solution. All the services beg for their own pet projects. What policy makers have to do is assess the threats and purchase to meet the needs.

It is a political, not a military question: what kind of armed forces does the country need?

Britain had better get the right answer - because defence spending is a long term issue and cannot be turned on and off.

A new arcraft might be ten years in gestation - and who know what war we will be involved ia decade from now?

If the first duty of a State is defence, then history will not be kind to Blair and Brown. On this issue , as on so many others, they have failed the nation.

Ask the maimed and crippled survivors of attacks on unarmoured Land Rovers in Afghanistan.

Ask the widows of the aircrew in unprotected Hercules aircraft in Iraq.

There genuinely is blood on Brown's hands.

JF

January 9th, 2009 10:40pm Report this comment

Next week, Blair will arrive in the White House to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It's NOT The White House he should be going-to! ... It's Guantanamo Bay, to a 'CELL'!

I'msoaware

January 10th, 2009 1:21am Report this comment

I agee totally that this is the first step towards awar with Iran. Lets not forget Pakistan nearby who are being provoked by America while all the other distractions are taking place. What right does any country outside Iran have to talk about their nuclear programme. Surely the most dangerous nuclear power on the planet is the US with its insane leaders hell bent on starting WW3. As for Cameron he is just another puppet for the onward march of world totalitarianism. If he is so concerned about matters domestic and abroad, then why he is he so quiet about the continued erosion of our rightful freedoms. The reason is there is a conspiracy to create a war time mindset so that it does come the sheople will comply and send their children to get slaughtered in unimaginable numbers. Just look at the history of this period at the beginning of the 20th century. As it stands our troops are in Afghanistan because America needs its oil pipeline protecting. What other natural resources are there? The Americans are doing the same as the Romans did 2k years ago. Alexander couldn't hold it,the British lost an Amry of 16k during their imperial expansion in that part of the world.

The Masked Marvel

January 11th, 2009 8:54pm Report this comment

Come now Fraser, the dear beloved President-elect Obama will never get sucked into a war to protect Israel. Contrary to the lie that Senator Biden told during the VP debate, the Democrats will not defend Israel, or even aid them. In fact, contrary to the insane ramblings of "Imsoaware", the current US President is denying help for Israel to do a bombing run on Iran's nuclear facility right now. If somebody who clowns like "Imsoaware" believe to the core of their very being is such an evil, bloodthirsty warmonger trying to start WW3 is refraining from helping Israel now, surely nobody can seriously believe that a Democrat President Obama would possibly do anything to help them.

Once Iran nukes Israel, there will be cries of "they deserved it" from Obama and the likes of "Imsoaware". Never mind that Israel hasn't fired a shot in anger against Iran in decades, and there are no Persians in the West Bank or Gaza.

If Israel gets nukes by Iran, Obama will not help, Fraser. He will join the BBC in the hand-wringing, though, if not the champagne celebration.

What's worse is that once Israel goes down, it's pretty much open season on Jews everywhere else. You're already seeing it in the streets of London and New York.

Post comment