International politics

To British ministers, the role that the International Criminal Court played over Libya was key – it made clear that Colonel Gaddafi’s actions were unacceptable and would be subject to international law. Tory MP Dominic Raab even wrote a piece in The Times about the need for Libyans to rely on the ICC in The Hague, rather than seek retribution and revenge against Gaddafi and his loyalists. And it wasn’t only the British government. German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi should be tried by the ICC: ‘Gaddafi should have a trial according to the law, something he never did with his opponents,’ Merkel said when

The future of Egypt has been hanging in the balance since Hosni Mubarak was toppled. Now there is real cause for concern, as scores of protesters clash with state security forces. The problem, above all, is military overreach. Stuck in a 1960s view of itself, and keen to preserve their money, status and power, the military has been thwarting the process of change. Since Mubarak’s fall they have continued behaving how they always have and worse — arresting protesters, muttering about US-led conspiracies, demanding extra-constitutional rights and clamping down on dissent. Worst of all, the West has been all to willing to take them at their word. Especially the Obama

It’s not going to happen. That’s what everyone says who knows anything about the subject that we’re going to be hearing quite a bit about this week: Turkey’s membership of the EU.  I’ve heard it from someone who works for William Hague, from a political editor, from a diplomat. Which makes this week’s state visit by the Turkish president, Abdullah Gul, on his three-day state visit to Britain seem pretty well beside the point.  The British government is right behind Turkey’s bid for EU membership, no country more so. David Cameron and William Hague have if anything been even more effusive in their support than Tony Blair and Jack Straw

Is Mario Monti’s administration in Italy democratic? Is Greece’s new government? To some, especially in the blogosphere, it is the exact opposite: a technocratic and undemocratic government foisted upon Italy and Greece by (circle as appropriate) Angela Merkel/Nicolas Sarkozy, the Bilderberg Group/EUSSR, etc. But nobody forced Silvio Berlusconi to resign. Nobody sacked him. Under pressure by the markets, he chose to resign. He could have stayed and nobody denied that he had a constitutional right to do so. It would have cost Italy dear, but he could have stayed. In addition, Monti was appointed to the Senate by the Italian president who himself is elected by Parliament in a joint

Berlusconi has finally resigned – and so continues what seems to be the Arab Spring in reverse (a Gnirps Bara). In the Arab world, people rose up against undemocratic juntas and democracy ruled. In Europe, undemocratic juntas are springing up in Frankfurt opera houses and toppling democracy. All Sarkozy had to do was help the rebels who wanted to remove the targeted leader. The cover story of this week’s magazine has a piece by yours truly about the Frankfurt Group of eight people who are calling the shots. Only two members are directly elected: Sarko and Merkel (well, three if you count the Prime Minister of Luxembourg, which we shouldn’t

The Eurocrisis has put Germany in a twofold position that it abhors. First, it has forced Germany into a much closer relationship with France than is comfortable. For German policymakers, the great thing about the post-enlargement EU, of 27 countries, was that they and France could not rule supreme — they needed to bring other states on board. Germany prefers it this way, as it dilutes France’s dirigiste instincts. But recent events have reshaped Europe’s decision-making system, recreating the pre-1973 model in which Paris and Berlin reigned. The second thing Berlin abhors is to dictate things to others. The catastrophes of the 20th Century forced Germany to remake itself. It

This week there were rumblings that war with Iran may be closer than most people thought. In a piece for the Spectator in 2004, Andrew Gilligan argued that even with a nuclear bomb, Iran would not be a threat to us: The case for not attacking Iran, Andrew Gilligan, 27 November 2004 Do the last few days remind you of anything, by any chance? Presidential heavy breathing about a ‘rogue’ Middle Eastern state; a supporting chorus of exiles with dramatic new claims; and a senior member of the US government bearing intelligence which turns out to be more spin than spine-chilling. Less than a month after the presidential election, the