United nations

A PR disaster for Israel

Prematurely, the world’s press has condemned Israel. As I wrote yesterday, the facts have to be established before Israel can be adjudged to have acted disproportionately. At the moment, the facts seem to support Israel. Video footage shows commandoes descending into a maelstrom of baseball bats and knives, armed with items that resemble paintball guns. The latest pictures released show a hoard of improvised explosives, machetes, bats, crowbars etc. Those sources’ veracity should be scrutinised, but there is nothing else to go on at the moment. Iain Martin has debunked Jon Snow’s absurd genuflection that this is our fault. Being British I apologise for everything, but not this time. Israel

The French ambassador has not contradicted Straw’s evidence to Chilcot

The drowsy Hay festival has been shaken by two bespectacled academics igniting a rather too intricate political bomb. Under the guise of a literary interview, Philippe Sands QC and the French ambassador to London, Maurice Gourdault-Montagne, have connived to attack Jack Straw’s evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry.   Straw was adamant that President Chirac was ‘unambiguous, whatever the circumstances’ in his refusal to back a second UN resolution. The Guardian reports that Gourdault-Montagne told the Hay festival: ‘Chirac had made it clear that he meant France could not have supported a new UN resolution at that time since it would have triggered an invasion despite the lack of evidence that

Britain’s man inside the UN

Sir John Holmes, the highest placed Briton at the UN, is leaving his job early. A long-serving Foreign Office mandarin, Sir John’s appointment by UN chief Ban Ki-Moon to be the UN’s Coordinator for Humanitarian Relief originally came as a surprise. The post is responsible for oversight of all emergencies requiring UN humanitarian assistance, and acts as the focal point for relief activities. Everyone had assumed that the British diplomat’s background lent itself more readily to the top political job at the UN, rather than the humanitarian portfolio. But Sir John (who will replace Jeremy Greenstock as director of Ditchley Park), has by all accounts done very well in the

Could Jacques Chirac add to the Chilcot inquiry?

The Iraq inquiry is making the political weather, much more than Gordon Brown expected. By the time of the general election, every key diplomat, soldier and politician involved in the war will have given evidence. But there are people that have played pivotal roles who should be given the chance to put their views across – not about the war as such but about Britain’s diplomatic and war record. I’m thinking of senior US officials, from President Bush down the hiearchy but also then-French President  Jacques Chirac, former UN chief Kofi Annan and so on. I’m not suggesting Sir John Chilcot broaden his inquiry to nor that ‘W’ would come

There were real, human costs to containment

On Today this morning, Nick Robinson said that Tony Blair would point to improvements in infant mortality and the like. Today then cut back to the studio where a reporter analysed this claim. The reporter disputed the validity of this claim and said that sanctions had ‘skewed’ the numbers. But the sanctions were a consequence of Saddam being in power. As long as he was there, there were going to have to be sanctions to contain his ambitions. Dennis Halliday, a UN official who resigned over sanctions, said that four to five thousand children a month were dying because of sanctions. There are intellectually respectable arguments on both the pro

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

Goldsmith’s advice strikes at the heart of all that is wrong with cronyism

Yesterday, I wrote that Jack Straw’s savagery in response to Goldsmith’s original advice bespoke of personal animosity. That may well be so, but Goldsmith’s testimony reveals that he was long convinced of his initial advice’s validity. Blair was exasperated with his friend’s stubbornness: “your advice is your advice,” he said pointedly. Yet eventually Goldsmith changed his mind. Why? Well plainly the government wanted him to because they thought he was wrong. Chronology is important here. Goldsmith wrote a note to Blair dated 12 January 2003 (three months before the invasion) reiterating his objections. Later in the month and at someone else’s suggestion, Goldsmith met Greenstock, who wanted to put the

Alex Massie

Lawyers dancing on Pinheads: Iraq Edition

I remain unpersuaded that there’s much point to the Chilcot Inquiry and the stramash over Lord Goldsmith’s interpretation of the legal case for toppling Saddam does little to change that. Paul Waugh has a nice, if somewhat scathing, summary here. But the case against the war’s legality is a) pretty irrelevent now and b) rests upon the dubious proposition that the French, Russian and Chinese governments had what amounted to a veto over US and UK policy and that without their approval the invasion/liberation of Iraq was not merely unwise but illegal. How many of those people most opposed to the war would have siged up for it had the

Jack Straw: The Ultimate New Labour Politician

He’s the man who managed to be the campaign manager to Tony Blair and then Gordon Brown. Just after the election-that-never-was in 2007 he let it be known that he had counselled against a snap election. Now the Sunday Times publishes the memo he sent to Tony Blair suggesting that the war might turn out to be a bad idea. Jack Straw: the man who always covers his back. In fact, Straw let the existence of this memo be known shortly after the war turned nasty. I considered it common knowledge when I wrote about it in 2007 and I’m pretty sure John Kampfner talked about it in his book

What will 2010 mean for Iran?

If you’re looking ahead to 2010, it’s a safe bet that Iran is going to be an even bigger issue than it was this year.  The violence currently rocking the country is an echo of June’s presidential election, and a reminder, too, of the continuing internal pressure that the Iranian regime faces.   The question now is whether that will be joined by external pressure of some form.  After provocation after procovation on Tehran’s part, it’s hard to envision the West keeping its “hand of friendship” outstretched much longer.  But it’s also unlikely that  Barack Obama – his eyes on the domestic polls – will want to talk too tough

What do Muslims think?

Coffee House readers sometimes complain that we do not talk enough about Muslims and Islam. I have certainly shied away from the subject, fearing that emotion and prejudice, rather than argumentation and empirical data, would dominate the debate. I don’t write about Christians, Jews or Buddhists, so why focus on Muslims? At any rate, I don’t like talking about collective groups, much as I prefer not to be talked about based solely on my heritage. But now a new study called Muslims in Europe allows for an empirically-based debate about sentiments across a number of Muslim communities. Based on interviews and surveys in 11 European cities, it presents some interesting

Welcome to Obamastan

After months of deliberation, endless consultation and reams of paper, President Obama came to the same conclusion that he himself had reached only a few months ago, and that which his handpicked commander, General McChrystal, had arrived at more recently: the US-led intervention is just, right and demands more resources. As usual, Obama’s oratory was impressive – though without the personal anecdotes he normally works in. He rejected comparisons with Vietnam and evoked World War II with a reference to President Roosevelt. The West Point cadets added a kind of battle-evoking gravitas that Obama, who has never worn a uniform or been in war, often struggles to evoke. His new

Disunited from the start

Twice in the 20th century, men have sought to create a new world order. The League of Nations, conceived with high hopes as a result of the Treaty of Versailles, failed catastrophically. At the outbreak of the second world war, it was to be found solemnly engaged in the task of standardising European railway gauges. The United Nations, by contrast, was born in a mood of profound disillusionment in 1945. It was not, so it seemed, only the League that had failed, but also the conception of man that had been embodied in it, a conception that had been torn apart so savagely by the Nazis. Unlike the League, the

US efforts to engage Iran appear to be over

New York The reaction of the Obama administration to the discovery of a secret, underground Iranian nuclear plant strongly suggests, as the Washington Post points out, that the administration has given up on engagement. Attempts to engage with the Iranian regime were always likely to be futile. But Washington had to show the international community, and the American public, that it had tried. The criticism you can make of the administration is that its effort took too long, nine months when the Iranian nuclear clock might have as little as 18 months left on it.  Now, the focus turns to sanctions. Can the UN pass sanctions that block gasoline imports, a

Gordon Brown gets something right!

Gordon Brown is expected to offer to decommission one of Britain’s four Trident submarines as part of nuclear non-proliferation discussions at the UN today. The Times has the details: ‘Mr Brown will signal tomorrow that he is ready to negotiate at a meeting of the UN Security Council on nuclear non-proliferation. It follows President Obama’s decision to ditch the US missile defence shield in Eastern Europe. That move, and Russia’s delighted response, has bolstered hopes that a new non-proliferation treaty could be agreed next spring. Officials travelling with the Prime Minister to New York insisted that there was no question of surrendering Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent. They claimed that current

What are they smoking?

In the midst of all the doom and gloom coming from Afghanistan, the UN has published a report saying that there had been a 22 percent decrease in poppy cultivation in the country and a 33 percent reduction in Helmand alone. The number of “poppy free” provinces has also increased from 18 to 20. The UN called this “undeniable progress” and a “dramatic turn. Desperate for good news, the FCO welcomed “this progress” and credited Helmand Governor Gulab Mangal for giving “people a real alternative to drugs and the Taliban.” No doubt Governor Mangal did his best, alongside Gul Agha Sherzai of Nangarhar province, which in the past used to

In Kosovo, progress is clear but work remains

Today Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the new NATO secretary-general, is visiting Kosovo as part of his get-to-know-the-job tour. What is so remarkable about this particular visit is, well, that it’s so unremarkable. That there is so little attention paid to the newly-independent country at all. Those, particularly on the Left, who railed against the war – and Kosovo’s declaration of independence almost ten years after NATO’s air campaign – have moved on. Their interest in Kosovo, let alone the Western Balkans, was instrumental. Those who predicted that the declaration of independence would spark another cycle of violence and the election of irredentist Serbs in Belgrade were wrong. Violence has been minimal

A new world order – don’t be silly

Go to any international think-tank conference and you will hear one complaint repeated ad nauseam: the intenational system, built after World War II – and incorporating the UN, NATO, the IMF, WHO etc. – is no longer fit for purpose. It needs to change to accomodate new threats, like climate change, and new powers like India and Brazil. The last point is particularly oft-heard. If India provides the majority of UN peacekeepers, should Delhi not have a permanent say on the UN Security Council? Now that China has become a pillar of the global economy, should the Beijing government not have more votes on the IMF board? The limited representation

Hollywood Beckons

You will all be delighted to hear that today I finally signed away the rights to my life story. Stop laughing at the back! Longstanding followers of The Bright Stuff will remember that I (perhaps rather grandly) said I was leaving the New Statesman to work on a film project. The Spy Who Tried to Stop a War is the story of Katharine Gun, the GCHQ whistleblower who disclosed details of a joint US/UK operation to fix the vote at the United Nations for a second resolution to authorise war in Iraq. As the recipient of the original leaked document from the US National Security Agency asking for GCHQ’s help I