International politics

Not yet a post-American Europe

I’m in Brussels where the only news is Obama’s cancellation of a trip to Madrid to join an annual EU-US confab.  The FT’s Gideon Rachman explains the anxiety caused by the decision: ‘There is no doubt that the Spanish government, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the EU (You thought it had been abolished? Fooled you!), will treat this as a bitter blow. The Spanish prime minister Jose Luis Zapatero was royally snubbed by George W. Bush and so it was really important to him to underline that he has a great relationship with the sainted Obama. (…) The Spanish are not the only Europeans feeling snubbed by Obama.

Talking to the Taliban | 29 January 2010

After the London conference, it is clear that “talking to the Taliban” will become part of the strategy in Afghanistan. But the conference left a number of important questions about what this means in practice unanswered. Talking to the Taliban is not a new idea. Even though he expelled a British and Irish diplomat for holding secret talks with Taliban in December 2007, President Karzai has become an advocate for such negotiations over the last two years. In the Spring of 2009, Saudi Arabia hosted tentative negotiations between Karzai’s representatives and former Taliban, with links to the current movement. But the idea now has a head of steam behind it.

Terrific, Baroness Ashton has made a dreadful start

Gordon Brown is a master of connivance. I never understood that he is contriving the EU’s destruction until hearing of Baroness Ashton’s glorious exploits. Agnes Poirier reveals all in the Times. CND’s sole attraction was that its protesters went home every evening and never worked weekends. Alas, the EU is for twenty four hour party people, but the 9 to 5 spirit of Greenham Common lives on in the EU’s High Representative and one time CND Treasurer, Baroness Ashton. Conscious of her carbon footprint, the Baroness commutes between London and Brussels most days and never answers the telephone after 8pm. This thoroughly civilised existence is a little maddening for the

Is the West rich enough to buy the Taliban?

The Lancaster House conference commences this morning and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has penned a stupefyingly worthy article in the Times, playing the same old tunes about the intention to ‘improve governance, fight corruption and bring Taleban fighters back into society if they are ready to lay down their arms.’ The Afghanistan mission has clarity of purpose in that attempts to build a democracy have been abandoned in favour of establishing lasting Afghan security. The nascent strategy relies too heavily on the Afghan National Army; as Daniel Korski notes, the non-ideological Taliban, those inscrutable soldiers of fortune, will facilitate or undermine stability. Richard Holbrooke is adamant that: “The overwhelming majority of

Negotiate, Negotiate, Negotiate

Whitehall has turned into the lobby of the UN General Assembly, as dignitaries gather to give NATO’s Afghan campaign renewed impetus. Will it all amount to much? It depends. In this piece for the magazine E!Sharp I set out my stall: ‘[if the conference] is to achieve anything more than fill out the evening news, the gathering must have only one aim: to help Hamid Karzai begin reaching out to insurgents and fence-sitters, drawing them into a negotiation that can drain the insurgency of all but the religiously-committed warriors.’ Part of this will involve giving money, jobs and security guarantees to foot-soldiers, as I recommended in a report back in

Kabul needs a big UN beast

The London Afghanistan conference is meant to appoint a civilian NATO coordinator to help align the counter-insurgency effort. The well-respected British ambassador in Kabul, Mark Sedwell, is a front-runner (as, incidentally, was Geoff Hoon until he plotted against Gordon Brown). If the press just publish the news, many questions will go unanswered. That’s not right. For the new post means that a two-year effort to make the UN the main aid coordinator has failed, and the appointee is likely to produce little unless individual NATO allies award him some spending power – a very unlikely scenario. There is nothing easier than to add a job to solve a problem, and

Obama is playing politics<br />

FDR was plainly confident when he indicted the “practices of unscrupulous money lenders” during his 1933 inauguration address; Obama’s speech yesterday was scented with desperation. He exchanged eloquence for provocation. “If these folks want a fight a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have.” Bankers do not want a fight with a President seeking cheap political capital; they want to turn profits and do business. Obama’s proposals frustrate that aim – by carving up corporations and neutering investment banking on the grounds of excess risk. As Iain Martin notes, Obama has departed from the G20’s emerging narrative, and though the details are imprecise there is no doubt of the

Cutting drugs

On Wednesday, Baroness Kinnock told the Lords that a number of Foreign Office departments had been hit been hit by an estimated £110 million budget shortfall, and that an anti-drug program in Kabul has been cut.  Coming after British dismay at President Karzai’s desire to put Afghanistan’s former (and widely-discredited) Interior Minister, Zarar Ahmad Moqbel, in charge of the country’s anti-drug effort, the cuts are bound to cause concern. Afghanistan is the world’s leading supplier of opiates, trafficked as opium, morphine and heroin. Over 90 percent of the heroin on the UK’s streets originates from Afghanistan. Though cuts to counterterrorism programs are probably ill-advised, there is less reason to worry

Ultimately, Brown is responsible for these anti-terror cuts

Seriousness comes naturally to Gordon Brown and yesterday he gave a speech detailing how Britain is defending itself by striking at the heart of the ‘crucible of terror’. What Brown has in seriousness of delivery, he lacks in realism. Britain has not fought for such a sustained period since the high-water mark of empire; but the ambitions of two prime ministers, and to be fair the severity of the threat that Britain faces, have outstripped resources; Britain is now completely over-extended. Hours after Brown’s speech, Baroness Kinnock divulged that anti-terror measures run by the Foreign Office have been cut – anti-narcotics campaigns in Afghanistan and de-radicalisation programmes in Pakistan. These

David Miliband’s big idea: an Af-Pak-India Council

An idea that has received little media attention in Britain, but is giving Foreign Office diplomats sleepless nights, is David Miliband’s push for a “regional stabilisation council” involving Pakistan, India and Afghanistan, to be unveiled at the international conference scheduled for January 28. The idea is seen as an innovate way to bring the three countries together, while at the same time allowing the Foreign Secretary, who will formally host the conference, to show leadership and initiative. The pretender to the post-election Labour throne needs something to get rid of his “Banana Boy” epithet. So far, however, the idea is not meeting with local support. Pakistan, in particular, is opposed

Rompuy wants the EU to slither onto the world stage

Well hello there, Rompuy. We haven’t heard much from the new EU president so far – he was upstaged by Barroso at the Copenhagen conference, showing that the EU stage only has room for one super-ego*. But with the Lisbon Treaty ratified, in defiance of public opinion in Britain (and Labour’s manifesto pledge), he now has powers to advance the EU project further. His idea today: the possible development of a “humanitarian rapid reaction force” for the EU. This rung a bell with me. When I did my tour of duty in the Scottish Parliament, this was a goal of the SNP. They want to creep on to the world

Deadly attack in Kabul = Taliban on the defensive

Many will claim that the Taliban’s recent attack in Kabul shows how powerful the insurgency has become. No doubt the psychological impact – the real aim of all terrorists – will be felt for some time. Faroshga market, one of the city’s most popular shopping malls, lay in ruins and the normally bustling streets of Kabul emptied. But the attack was an operational failure. All seven militants died in the attack; five were gunned down and two killed themselves. Three soldiers and two civilians — including one child — were killed. Seventy-one others were injured, including 35 civilians, but the majority are only slightly wounded. Such a toll must frustrate

Helping Haiti

As the world has geared up to help a devastated Haiti, new challenges came into view. Destroyed ports, a crumbling airport and the lack of a local counterpart are hampering the international effort to help people still trapped under the rubble. Survivors, many of whom have no place to sleep, may have lost friends and family, and are now left to scavenge for food.  President Obama has pledged $100 million and is dispatching 5,000 soldiers, as well as a hospital ship. Britain, China, France, Belgium and even debt-saddled Iceland have followed suit.  But the scale of the disaster is frightening. When it becomes clearer how best to help, I will

The growing threat of a military coup in Iraq

Predictably, insurgency in Iraq has intensified as the March elections near; its scale and frequency was not predicted. Alastair Campbell beamed as a benevolent Uncle when talking about Iraq on Tuesday but Coalition diplomats fear for the democracy’s future.  British ambassador to Baghdad, John Jenkins, told the Chilcot inquiry: “Iraq faces a real possibility of a military coup…Although I think where we are at the moment is much better than where we thought it was going be back in  2004-05 you only need look at the history of Iraq to understand that a realistic threat still exists.” Ayad Jamal Aldin, a Shia cleric who leads the anti-corruption, anti-Iranian and pro-secular

Cutting the Foreign Office

Spending cuts are coming – we all know that.  And if any party is serious about tackling the debt mountain, then pretty much every department will have to face the axe in some form or other.  But wherever that axe falls, you can expect loud protest in reponse.  Cut the RAF, and a former Chief of the RAF will pop up on TV and say that the cuts will endanger the nation. Rationalise the NHS, and the party responsible will be called heartless. Close the High Commission in Port Moresby, and the newspapers will be full of stories about the historical link between Britain and Papua New Guinea. So to

Getting rid of the 0.7 percent aid target

A leader in yesterday’s Times concentrated on the Conservatives’ aid policy – and, in particular, their commitment (shared by the government and by plenty of developed nations) to spend 0.7 percent of gross national income on development assistance. There was much to like in the article, but it misses a few key points and trains too much fire at the Tories. The key points to make about the 0.7 percent commitment is that it is not based on any assessment of how much money is needed to achieve any defined set of objectives, and has not been revised since it was set forty years ago to take into account new

In preparing for war, the Tories differ from Labour in one respect – they would be prepared

In today’s Times, and on the occasion of George Osborne and William Hague’s visit to Helmand, the Tories are publishing proposals for how to improve the Government’s approach to post-conflict operations. Their central idea: to create a stabilisation force in the military, complete with the necessary expertise, training and so on to win the peace after combat. If it was not already abundantly clear, the Iraq Inquiry has shown how ill-prepared the British state – civil service, military and government – was for post-combat reconstruction. Though much has changed since the Iraq War – e.g. a dedicated department, the Stabilisation Unit, has been set up in Whitehall, and General David

Cancel the London Afghanistan Conference

In a few weeks time, a slew of foreign ministers will descend on London to attend a conference on Afghanistan. No.10 will use the event to sell Gordon Brown as a statesman, confidently dealing with the nation’s threats. The Conservatives, in turn, will probably try to score the usual points about Britain’s failure, alongside its NATO allies, to make any in-roads in the fight against the Taliban. Together with Tony Blair’s evidence to the Iraq Inquiry, the conference may create one of the few moments in the drawn-out election campaign when the three party leaders stop talking about the NHS and focus on national security issues instead. Too bad, then,

Oh dear, Gordon’s done it again

The knicker-bomber must love this. Twice Gordon Brown has jumped on the bandwagon and bounced straight off on both occasions. Sky News reports that the UK did not pass vital information to the US, despite the claims of a Downing Street spokesman. Here’s the key section: ‘During a briefing to journalists today, the Prime Minister’s spokesman said: “There is no suggestion the UK passed intelligence to the US that they did not act on.” But Sky’s political correspondent Joey Jones said it had been an “awful” briefing. “He tried to clear things up but only succeeded in muddying the waters still further,” Jones said. “After he read Downing Street’s statement,

Why profiling is essential

It is a truth, yet to be universally acknowledged, that the overwhelming majority of global terrorism is committed by radical Muslims. However, the Guardian reports that Whitehall has reached that conclusion and passenger profiling is “in the mix” of the latest airport security review. Thank God, sense prevails at last. The previous airport review, conducted in the aftermath of the liquid bomb plot, decided against profiling. What followed was a fatuous politically correct concoction. Even pilots’ toothpaste was examined; one pilot commented: “If I want to kill everyone (on board) I don’t faff around with plastic explosives, I point the nose at the ground”. Such determined absurdity should be behind us. Alas, not everyone gets