Malcolm Blair-Robinson's Blog, page 182
February 26, 2015
Ukraine: It Depends How You See It.
You can look at an international situation in two ways; tribally or strategically. Tribally means you behave like a football supporter. Your team is always good and theirs is always bad. This is how the West presently handles Russia. Or you can take a strategic view. What are the issues? Who fears what? What is the impact on innocent civilians? How can accord be reached that creates common interests, but also respects individual fears? Where are the lines in the sand? The strategic approach can lead to better times, so long as it does not involve uneven concessions by one side or the other. The tribal approach leads to permanent tension and frequently war.
This is why this blog constantly criticizes the unimaginitive proclamations of the British government and its unconditional support for Kiev. The latest plan to send 75 troops to back up Kiev’s forces in a non-combat role is very disappointing as it reveals that nothing so far has been learned. Modern Russia is not the rigid structure of the old Soviet Empire. Putin’s counter of a deal with Cyprus to enable Russian Warships to use her ports is altogether more imaginative and a signal to Whitehall that if it wants to play this way it will have to up its game.
BROWSE MY BOOKS WITH THESE LINKSUK ELECTION: How Does It Look?
If we are talking about the length of the campaign the answer must depend on whether you like politics or not. If we are talking about the outcome, there is no way yet of predicting what that will be. A hung parliament looks certain, but it is not clear who will lead the resultant coalition and how many parties have to join in to provide a majority. Nor is it clear whether there will be a coalition or whether the largest party will try to govern without a majority on a confidence and supply basis.
Because of the ridiculous decision to keep first past the post when six credible parties are in contention for votes, tactical voting could deliver a significant majority to one party on a derisory minority of votes. And then there is Scotland, and how many Scot Nats win Westminster seats. Of course we cannot forget Wales and Ulster and how their nationalist MPs might choose to vote in confidence motions. And then there is this business of English votes for English laws.
Never in history has the electorate of this country faced such a potential muddle. The wonder will be if we get an effective government of any complexion. The mere fact that it can govern at all may be seen as a triumph.
February 24, 2015
Rifkind And Straw.
At one level it is rather sad to see the political careers of two grandees in meltdown. At another it is shocking to suppose that this kind of thing still goes on and some of it is apparently within whatever rules these politicians have set up to police themselves.
Milliband, seeing a toxic brew steaming before him, has declared that all second jobs are to be banned from all Labour candidates standing for parliament in May. That is wise because voters have lost all patience with the political class whom they regard as both liars and on the make for themselves above all else. Cameron is less strident knowing that if he follows suit he will have no candidates left give or take a handful.
There is however a difference between a trade union official who is also a backbench MP, or a shareholder in a family business or some other activity which they have established themselves in before standing for parliament in the first place and about which those who elect them have full knowledge, and the practice of selling political favours for cash. It is no good having rules within which these favours my be sold. The practice must be stopped absolutely.
It is a form of corruption just like any other because it means that those who pay fees (they are different to bribes in their definition but are they in their effect?) to exert influence and change rules can gain commercial or personal advantage. As for the protestations of those caught red handed in a sting, that they have done nothing wrong; these are greeted with incredulity. It may be the case they have not broken any rules or indeed any laws, but it is certainly the case that few would describe what they were up to as right.
Politicians seem to think it is okay to sell the influence and knowledge they gain as representatives of voters in parliament, for their own personal gain. Voters have many words to describe what they do. One description which I heard which seemed apt, was soft corruption. Another, more colourful, was political prostitution. But whatever you call it the time has come to stop it.
February 23, 2015
Good Value Thrillers
VALUE READS
Download all five fast reading thrillers now! Offered at 99p or 99c. Or buy paperbacks from £4.99. Orders over £10 postage free.
MPs On The Make: Not Again?
This blog will refrain from passing judgment until after the C4 programme tonight, but there is a general point worth making. It is not whether rules have or have not been broken that causes public disquiet. It is the very idea that members of parliament are able to sell for personal gain the skills or connections they acquire by acting as representatives of voters at Westminster, where they are paid nearly three times the average salary as a backbencher and considerably more as a minister. Selling favours of any kind or making introductions for cash is seen as a form of soft corruption which most decent ‘hard working people who want to get on’ to use the favourite catchphrase of the hustings, deplore. So it does not matter whether they are guilty of breaking their own rules or not. The whole idea stinks.
One wonders why any genuine company would pay to hire people so naive as to fall into these fiscal honey traps set by newspapers anyway. Perhaps they don’t, which is why the traps always catch something.
February 21, 2015
Ukraine : US and UK Must Get Real
John Kerry has arrived in London to have talks with Philip Hammond in a weird atmosphere in which words like land grab and craven are used to describe the Russians.
This blog has always held the Kiev government and its supporters who toppled the previous government a year ago responsible for the chaos now engulfing Ukraine. There is no need to rehearse again the reasons why, but a trawl through old posts will act as a reminder. The difference now is that more and more western correspondents and TV crews are getting into the eastern provinces behind rebel lines and more and more interviews with suffering civilians are being broadcast which throw ever more doubt upon the integrity of the West’s posture in this crisis. On top of that we yesterday had the scathing report from the House of Lords which spoke of misreading the crisis and a lack of analytical skills at the Foreign Office.
Talk of the territorial integrity of the Ukraine is meaningless. Through its own ill advised actions, spurred on by some reckless promises from the EU which were undeliverable and should never have been made, the Ukraine is now broken up and will not be put back together. Crimea has gone, the eastern provinces are going and what is left will just have to make the best of the bad job of which it is the architect.
And as for the UK, the EU and the US, they will have to pick over the shambles of their diplomacy and learn some very useful lessons.
Steamy Thriller
Set in the mid nineteen nineties, this fast moving thriller lifts the curtain on sex, sleaze and corruption in high places as the long reign of the government totters to an end, following the ousting of the iconic Margaret Thatcher. Downfall in Downing Street catches the mood of those times with a host of fictional characters who engage in political intrigue, sex, money laundering and murder, pursued by an Irish investigative journalist and his girlfriend, the daughter of a cabinet minister found dead in a hotel room after bondage sex.
AMAZON.COM AMAZON.UK Kindle or Papaerback
Greece v Germany: Who Blinked?
Both of them. The new Greek government was not ready to default and exit the euro, because it knows that while it has full backing to confront the EU over its bailout terms and the failed austerity programme, it does not have a majority to exit the eurozone. Yet. But if the demands are too steep that will change. So to buy time it gave ground.
Germany looked at the bill if Greece dropped out of the euro and also looked at the blow to its own leadership of Europe if that happened. It would be blamed for the disaster and moreover would face further huge investments to keep Italy, Spain and Portugal from following Greece out. Merkel sees this, but she has trouble with her finance minister who sees only financial rectitude and reform. So she has manged to get a deal which will push Greece to the limit of its democratic mandate. It is the fine judgement of what that limit actually is which will determine whether the battered euro edifice remains standing, or whether bit by bit it tumbles down.
