I posted this blog almost a year ago. I am reposting it now with sadness that I have not been proved wrong.
Miliband's political assassination of the attempt by Cameron to do something of value in Syria should not be forgotten.
MORIBUND AND FARAGE ELIMINATE CAMERON AND CLEGG TO RULE LITTLE ENGLAND.
Thursday night I was shocked
Thursday night I was shocked
Friday I was depressed
Today I am disentangling my thoughts
about the parliamentary decision not to take any action in regard to
Syria.
I am a cynic about intervention. I
know that human costs and collateral damage can never be calculated
or avoided. Nevertheless I dreamed that an adventurous, pro-active
solution might be found to prevent a little of the suffering in
Syria. I do think doing nothing has its dangers.
Leaving aside Syria for the moment .
. .
I found what happened to Britain on
Thursday night far more disturbing and worrying. There is a shift in
our democratic government. Oppositional parties no longer work as
they once did. Voters are increasingly sophisticated about being
manipulated. They want economic and technical competence from a
government not vote-teasing promises. Britain has a hung parliament
and probably will have for the foreseeable future. We are governed by
committees, quangos, reviews, inquiries, planners and bureaucratic
technocrats. We are governed by the middlemen and on the whole by
agreement.
A government of a committee of
different parties cannot however, make a decision to go to war or to
intervene militarily. It is not in the nature of such a government.
It is difficult enough for the
United Nations.
Is this a danger?
Yes, as Tony Blair found. He made
the right decision to go to war in Iraq which we had been bombing
since the first Gulf War anyway. He knew the public would never agree
so he and Bush fudged the evidence.
Unforgivable?
Necessary?
Ed Miliband was determined to show
how different he is to Blair. He even suggested that Cameron was
acting like Blair.
Leaving this aside for the moment .
. .
It is true that the nature of a
British public constituted of well-fed, educated, comfortable and
secure people, is anti-war. We largely agree that we need a defence
force. We are not sure how it should be used. Once we leave
Afghanistan we will for the first time in 70 years not be engaged in
any war except for the deadly serious war in cyberspace that we are
not informed about and never get to vote for or to debate in
parliament. Some of us don't know if it is more important to be
protected from Trolls on the Internet than to have the right to
privacy, freedom of the press and the freedom of information. It is a
dilemma.
Leaving this aside for the moment .
. .
Britain and America are blamed as
Imperialists and the policemen of the world. Sadly history has made
us and the power its gave can't be magicked away. It has its uses. It
may perhaps be used well. South Africa is in the same situation with
regard to Africa and so now is China. The Syrian situation is
extraordinarily complicated and dangerous. It is not impossible that
events in the Middle East could force back the boundaries of human
rights and liberties for us all especially as some rights are so
frail and recently recognised. There are no answers, no ways to proceed in
Syria that are sure to make the world safer. Protecting women and
children and civilians from nerve gas attacks may be very difficult
but on Thursday night I thought it was morally essential for Britain
to take a stand.
Britain did not.
How can our government decide to go
to war or to intervene? I suggest that it can't be done by
parliamentary debate and MPs being whipped to attend. For us to be
properly defended we would need a Defence Committee to take such
decisions. Inevitably the public would not be and could not be, and
never will be, completely informed of all the facts and all the
dangers.
Leaving aside the dangers to Civil
liberties and Freedom of Press that this would bring . . .
Lets go back to what was for me the
truly depressing outcome of Thursday night. It wasn't that Cameron
lost and we haven't decided to bash Bashir. It was that we voted to
be 'Little England' as defined by Nigel Farage's clownish
absurdities.
Poor, poor Little England what are
you going to do?
All your assets and banks and
industries are owned or shared by global interests. Most of what you
eat and drink is outsourced. You may only be the poodle of America
and the rest of the world but now you are biting all the fingers that
feed you.
Poor, poor Little England where in
the world of the Global Village are you going to hide yourself?
Leaving aside for the moment the
mean-spirited, narrow-minded and self-centred nature of Farage's
Little England . . .
What shocked me most about Thursday
night was the cold, calculated, political opportunism of Ed Miliband.
He appeared to see his own advancement as the only important result
to be achieved that day. He used Parliament to destroy Cameron's
credibility by betraying his own agreement with Cameron – that may
be politics and Cameron is his opponent – but the cost of what he
did will diminish the world standing of Britain – it is also to the
detriment of those Syrians who need help most – women and children
and civilians.
Ed Miliband is not a likeable or
charismatic leader. He does not generate an air of trustworthiness. I
was ready to give him a chance in case he did turn out to be a man of
the people. What I saw in Ed's attack on Cameron was the steel of an
assassin's knife and I remembered that I had seen it glint behind his
brother David's shoulder at the Labour leadership elections.
(Images are recent press photos)
(Images are recent press photos)
