Skip to main content

The point of an ethical foreign policy



After the fall of the regimes of Tunisia and Egypt and the protests across the Arab world, the Jasmine revolution now seems set to claim the scalp of the brutal and absurd Libyan leader, Gaddafi.

What a joy it might have been to know that British hostility to this evil and tyrannical figure had been unrelenting. After all, we have suffered much at his hands: support for terrorist attacks against us, including vigorous funding of the IRA. Whatever the actual truth of the Lockerbie bomb, the fact remains that a Scottish court convicted a Libyan state official of the crime. Gaddafi has long been an enemy of the UK.

So why did Tony Blair cut a deal with this monster?

American critics suggest that pressure from BP persuaded the former Labour PM that a deal would be much in the interests of the British economy. As the UK prepares to evacuate its citizens from Libya, many working for BP, such a deal seems a lot less useful than it seemed at the time.

As the long banned Green-Black-Red flag now flies in open defiance of Gaddafi's own totalitarian green banner, the days of this opera-bouffe dictator seem very numbered- as they certainly should be. Yet it makes me sick to my stomach that Britain appears to have sold equipment to Gaddafi that he has used to butcher his own people.

After the massacres in Benghazi and Tripoli, I imagine that Gaddafi will probably end dangling from a lamp post. It is hard not to feel a contempt for those who betrayed an ethical foreign policy, hypocritically believing that British interests rested on trade with a monstrous tyrant who was a proven enemy, rather than staying true to the traditions of freedom and democracy that underpin our society; principles that the Libyan people are- even now- dying for.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...
1 comment
Read more

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...
20 comments
Read more