The French get annoyed, again.

The European Defence Agency is embarking on a research programme into methods for protecting soldiers in urban environments. The French are annoyed because the British government is refusing to throw money down the drain of this project, arguing it would merely duplicate existing UK research programmes.

The UK actually uses its defence budget for defence,that is, to participate in military operations with its NATO allies in places like like Iraq and Afghanistan. France and most of the rest do not; their politicians ensure that their armies avoid combat. The main exception amongst the rest is Netherlands. It was with some justification, therefore, that at the last EDU meeting, the Dutch defence minister complained that, whereas NATO should be the main focus of European Union security, the French defence minister,

...had given an introduction during the meeting about citizens expecting security provision from the EU but without hardly mentioning NATO.

"She completely puts the accent on the EU. The Netherlands and other countries have tried to look at this also on the other side."

He went on to say that he himself had reacted with a plea that NATO is the main security provider.

Tags: Defence, EDA, European Union

Blair : foreign policy speech,

Last night in his speech to the Lord Mayor's Banquet in London, Tony Blair advocated solving the problems of the Middle East, including both Israel and and Iraq, by enlisting Iran and Syria as partners for peace.

The purpose of ideological terrorism, Blair said, is "now plain:" it is,

to provoke civil war. The violence is not therefore an accident or a result of faulty planning. It is a deliberate strategy. It is the direct result of outside extremists teaming up with internal extremists - Al Qaida with the Sunni insurgents, Iranian backed Shia militia - to foment hatred and thus throttle at birth the possibility of non-sectarian democracy. These external elements are, of course, the same elements driving extremism the world over.

The Prime Minister said terrorism is a global problem which needs to be approached through a "whole Middle East strategy". In the key passage of the speech, linking the problem of Islamic terrorism directly to Israel and Palestine, he continued,

There is a fundamental misunderstanding that this is about changing policy on Syria and Iran. First, those two countries do not at all share identical interests. But in any event that is not where we start.

On the contrary, we should start with Israel/Palestine. That is the core. We should then make progress on Lebanon. We should unite all moderate Arab and Moslem voices behind a push for peace in those countries but also in Iraq. We should be standing up for, empowering, respecting those with a moderate and modern view of the faith of Islam everywhere.

The British government will not be seeking a military solution to the dangers of a nuclear Iran. Instead, the Iranian government will be offered "a clear strategic choice": Iran can either accept a partnership in the Middle East peace process and the fight against terrorism or face isolation.

Wow. Isolation , with presumably the implicit threat of United Nations sanctions. The policy outlined in the speech is exactly what had been signalled earlier. It is hard to resist the conclusion that, in the US elections, Bush was holed below the waterline and now the British rat is leaving the sinking ship. As a Daily Telegraph leader observes, the lunatics have been invited to run the asylum.

In the UK press: the Guardian emphasises the shift of focus to the Palestinian problem; the Times headlines the Syria and Iran angle; and, for a headline,"Our new friends in the Middle East" the Independent renames some of the paper's very old friends.

Meanwhile the Daily Telegraph reports that Blair's new Iranian friends are plotting to replace the ailing al Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden, with individuals sympathetic to Iran. As the paper observes, before moving on to analyses Blair's speech,

The revelation will deal a major blow to Tony Blair's hopes of establishing a "new partnership" with Teheran.

Tags: Iran, Israel, terrorism, Tony Blair, War on Terror

Neobans and Neocons

News Central Asia has an article entitled "The Neobans and the Neocons" which examines what the author, a Karachi lawyer, calls the USA's "aggressive and expansionist agenda in the South and Central Asia and Middle East." Essentially, it is a potted Pakistani history of the War on Terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including Waziristan, covering al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Waziri Accord; it refers to the latter as the MiramShah Agreement, after the place where it was signed.

It contains nothing startlingly new but it does provide a useful historical time-line and general reference to past events. Moreover, it is both interesting and instructional to view those events, and the roles in them of al Qaeda and the Taliban, from a Pakistani perspective. The fairly long article is split into four parts.

Part One;

Part Two;

Part Three;

Part Four.

The term "neoban" does not appear outside the title and I can find no relevant reference to the word , so the author may be victim of a sub-editor and a fairly awful pun on Taliban.

Tags: Afghanistan, al Qaeda, Pakistan, Taliban, War on Terror, Waziristan, USA

Merry Christmas, Happy Eid (updated)

It is not just Christians fighting back against the denigration of Christmas by secular multi-cultural extremists. Now, Muslims have joined the argumentby joining an inter-faith call for the atheist rabble to keep off all religious festivals. I came across the story in the print edition of this morning's Daily elegraph. Strangely, given the press coverage the issue has generated, at the time of this post, Google News gives only one other reference: the Sun.

The call was made by the Christian-Muslim Forum, a body set up earlier this year to encourage greater co-operation between the faiths for the good of the whole community. The BBC has the background and details.

Here is the (reformatted) statement in full:

Religious Festivals and Celebrations

We have faced various calls over the past few years for the secularisation or de-Christianisation of certain religious festivals. In particular, certain local authorities have decided that Christmas shall be called by another (non-religious) name. The reason usually given is that to use a specifically Christian name for this festival offends members of other religious traditions.

As Muslims and Christians together we are wholeheartedly committed to the retention of specific religious recognition for Christian festivals. Christmas is a celebration of the birth of Jesus and we wish this significant part of the Christian heritage of this country to remain an acknowledged part of national life. The desire to secularize religious festivals is in itself offensive to both of our communities. We believe that the only beneficiaries of eroding the residual Christian presence in public life are those committed to a totally non-religious standpoint. We value the presence of clear institutional markers within society which embody the reality and mystery of God in public life rather than evacuating the public space of any such reminder.

We believe that our open and democratic society should promote freedom of religion in the public space rather than negatively restrict its observance. We welcome, for instance the public recognition of Eid al Fitr, as Muslims celebrate together at the conclusion of the month of Ramadan. We value the partnership evident in some local communities which gives opportunity for others to share with Muslims at this time of celebration. This is a positive way of affirming the public contribution that people of different religious traditions bring to our society. We believe that any attempt to privatise and hide the celebration of religious festivals promotes frustration, alienation and even anger within religious communities. Such negative approaches devalue religion and undermine the positive contributions that faith communities bring to society.

We also rejoice in the contribution and value of all religious communities in our country ­ Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist and others. It is important for the integrity of all religious traditions that we recognise the centrality of major festivals within each community. In our increasingly diverse society we need to foster a mature and healthy approach to religious diversity which both recognizes the specific Christian heritage of this country and welcomes the important part that other religious traditions increasingly play within our culture. This demands a greater religious understanding on the part of government and local authorities than has been evident or necessary in the past.

We are thankful for those policies and actions which are responding helpfully to our changing religious environment. On the other hand we are concerned that those approaches which are based on anti-religious philosophies or a fear of religion are in danger of causing alienation in a wide variety of communities and fanning the growth of extremism.

Those who use the fact of religious pluralism as an excuse to de-Christianise British society unthinkingly become recruiting agents for the extreme right. They provoke antagonism towards Muslims and others by foisting on them an anti-Christian agenda which they do not hold.

Human beings require occasions for festival and celebration and, for many in our society, these opportunities are fundamentally religious and spiritual in nature as we mark the high points in our different traditions.

We call on all with responsibility in national and local government to give space and encouragement to an open and welcoming space for religious festivals as part of a positive contribution to community cohesion.

Released by Bishop David Gillett, Chair of the national Christian Muslim Forum and Dr Ataullah Siddiqui, Vice Chair of the Forum.

Update 13.11.06 @19:45.

Reuters has picked up the story, so it is starting to circulate round the world.

A good article from the Times of India.

Tags: Chritmas, Christianity, Islam, Multi-culturalism

More false child murder accusations before the GMC.

Here we go again. Another case of false accusations of infanticide is up before the General Medical Council's disciplinary body. This time it is Dr David Southall, for whom it will not be a novel experience. You may remember Southall as the doctor who initially accused Sally Clark of child murder. Clark was cleared on appeal and, despite being censured by the GMC, Southall was not struck off but allowed to continue as a doctor with some restrictions. That was one of the cases through which Roy Meadow came to prominence. Now Southall is up for more arrogant incompetence. The Evening Standard:

A leading paediatrician accused a grieving mother of drugging and murdering her son, a disciplinary panel heard today.

Professor David Southall abused his professional position and acted inappropriately when interviewing the mother, called Mrs M to protect her anonymity, about the death of her 10-year-old son, who hanged himself in June 1996, it heard.

Prof Southall, who was found guilty of serious professional misconduct in 2004 after accusing solicitor Steve Clark of murdering two of his sons, faces fresh allegations today. They relate to several children in his care in the 1980s and 1990s.

The core of the story is that Southall made serious allegations based solely on his opinion.

The Guardian is also covering the story: here and here.

Tags: Child murder, false accusations, medical, Professor Southall

Hard drugs: now you know it makes sense.

The Home Office is to pay tens of thousands pounds to heroin-addicted criminals for the distress they suffered through being deprived their fixes when in jail. Criminal heroin junkies are using public money to sue the government under Human Rights legislation and, rather than fight the case, the Home Office has agreed to settle out of court. Up to 200 addicts could be involved. For legal anoraks, the Daily Telegraph has the relevant articles of the European Convention on Human Right.

David Davies, shadow home, secretary estimates the bill could be at least £2m. There must now be some very happy heroin dealers.

Tags: Heroin, Home Office, Human Rights

Labour goes to war.

Yesterday's highlight of the Labour Party's internal electioneering battle was Harrriet Harman, the Constitutional Affairs minister, trespassing on Foreign Office turf with some not very helpful anti-American rhetoric.

Today belongs to finance minister, Gordon Brown, who is trying to further his ambitions to be Tony Blair's successor by trampling on the Home Secretary's ground. Brown has publicly endorsed a controversial police demand that they be allowed to detain terrorist suspects for up to 90 days without charge, rather than the current 28. According to the Daily Telegraph:

Home Office insiders last night underlined the simmering tensions between the two men by playing down Mr Brown's intervention. "We welcome any contribution to what is an important debate," said one official.

Meanwhile, the Home Secretary, John Reid, is busy conducting his own campaign to thwart Brown so that he, Reid, can succeed Blair as Prime Minister. The Daily Express reports:

The Home Secretary shattered the truce over the Labour leadership with plans for a fresh assault on terrorism and crime in this week’s Queen’s Speech.

The aim is to show that he, rather than Chancellor Gordon Brown, is the best man to lead a nation under threat. The move came as the country’s top policeman [again demanded a 90 day detention period and so] cranked up the already tense atmosphere over security policy.

It is hard to see how the government can effectively combat terrorism when it is consumed by electioneering, both internal and party political. Indeed, a report, published today, for the leftish Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, The Rules of the Game: Terrorism, Community and Human Rights concludes that, as the Daily Telegraph puts it, that

the Government's anti-terrorism policy is being damaged by party political interests and vote-seeking on the part of ministers...
...It also accused Tony Blair and John Reid, the Home Secretary, of playing to a "tabloid agenda" and "trying to win over the white working class vote."

Sensible plans to combat terror are now being "submerged by the Government's 'electoral motives'" according to the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust.

Tags: Gordon Brown, Reid, Rowntree

British fatalities in Iraq: (updated)

The Ministry of Defence has announced the death of four servicemen in Iraq, after an attack on a patrol boat. Three others are seriously injured.

The attack took place on the Shatt Al-Arab waterway in Basra city at around 1300 local time on Sunday 12 November 2006.

The injured personnel have been medically evacuated to Shaibah Logistics Base by helicopter. No further details will be released until the next of kin have been informed.

The total of UK fatalities in Iraq is now 125.

Reuters reports:

The routine patrol was caught in an explosion caused by an improvised bomb, a [MoD] spokesman said.

Captain Tane Dunlop, the Multi-National forces spokesman in south Iraq, told the BBC: "The use of improvised explosive devices is very common in Iraq. It is slightly unusual in that this time it was targeting a boat." Britain has some 7,000 troops in southern Iraq, which has generally been calmer than the centre and north of the country, and 125 British armed forces personnel have died since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

From the BBC:

British military personnel have been patrolling the waterway, which borders with Iran and is considered a vital supply line, since 2003.

The attack took place at 0950 GMT (1250 local time) on Sunday and is thought to be the first such attack on a patrol boat.

BBC correspondent David Loyn, speaking from Baghdad, said: "It was quite an extraordinary attack.

"The boat was on the water with at least seven military personnel on board. We don't know if they were marines or soldiers."

Update 13.11.06 08:30

From the Guardian:

Two of the soldiers killed were from 45 Commando Royal Marines and one each was from the Royal Signals and the Intelligence Corps, the Ministry of Defence said.

An MoD spokesman said the families of the soldiers killed and injured have now been informed, but some had requested a period of 24 hours before their names were released.

He anticipated they would be named on Tuesday morning.

He said the condition of one of the three men hurt had "improved significantly", although two remain very seriously injured.

More from the Times

Tags: Iraq

Archbishop of York on secularism:

Hitherto, John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, has been most notable for shaving his head and spending a holiday in a luxury tent in York Minister as some kind of peace protest over events in the Middle East.

Now the Ugandan-born prelate has entered the domestic political arena. In an interview with the Daily Mail Dr Sentamu lays into the secularism of the chattering classes.

...this country disbelieves in itself in an amazing way.

It almost dislikes its own culture, it doesn't realise that the arts, music, buildings have grown out of a strong Christian tradition....

...The Archbishop blames the wilfulness of the 'chattering classes' for its destruction. 'They see themselves as holding the flag for Britain and that Britain is definitely secular and atheist. I want them to have their say but not to lord it over the rest of us.'

Other targets include PC opposition to Christmas, the BBC's selective attacks on Christianity but not Islam, Muslim veils and what he calls the the four great demons in our society: Idolatry, Militarism, Materialism and Racism.

Tags: Archbishop of York, John Sentamu

Monckton debunks climate change: part 2.

The Sunday Telegraph has Part 2 of Christopher Monckton's demolition of the Stern report on global warming, climate change and the end of life as we know it.

Last week I linked to part one and Monckton's detailed references and calculations.

Tags: Climate change, Environment, Global Warming, Mockton

Harriet Harman: foot in mouth disease.

Harriet Harman, the Constitutional Affairs minister, has been sounding off about foreign policy and defence matters. On GMTV this morning, she laid into the US military for refusing to send witnesses to the inquests for British soldiers killed in Iraq. The Guardian reports:

...she said she was seeking a meeting with senior Washington officials in a bid to persuade them to meet families' wishes by providing servicemen and experts to give evidence.

"We have got an expectation that they should come, so that the bereaved relatives of the deceased servicemen can actually ask questions of what happened," she said in an interview for GMTV's Sunday programme. "When they don't come that's not acceptable and we are prepared to say that's not acceptable."

She is taking action after the coroner investigating British deaths in war zones expressed his frustration that American witnesses are not made available.

The coroner in question would be Andrew Walker, of Terry Lloyd inquest notoriety, the Deputy Coroner at Oxford.

There is little to say about the inquests that has not been said before: unfortunate tragedies happen in war and nothing is gained by seeking scapegoats. There is also little to be said about Harman, except that she personifies the dismal quality of too many ministers in Blair's government.

The significant issue raised by the story is why is Harman intruding into territory which is normally the preserve of the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence? Do the current holders of those traditionally major offices - Margaret Beckett, foreign secretary, and Des Browne, defence minister - really exert so little influence within the government that they cannot prevent a relatively junior Cabinet figure trampling all over their turf and creating who knows what problems for their departments to deal with? Unfortunately, that appears to be the case.

Harman is undoubtedly electioneering, playing to the Labour left's anti-American sentiment in the hope of becoming the next deputy leader of the party. It is just another example of how this government is sinking into disarray, as ministers give less attention to their departmental business and spend more time and effort positioning themselves for the post-Blair era.

Related link: BBC

Tags: Harriet Harman, Iraq, Politics

Even yet more on cash for honours.

Like old man river, the case keeps rolling on and the politicians are beginning to show-boat.

The Independent reports that Scotland Yard is now investigating allegations that Blair and friends did not tell the Labour Party's auditors about £12m worth of donations related to the cash for honours scandal; consequently, the auditors signed off the party's 2004 accounts unaware that they were seriously inaccurate. This takes the investigation to a new level. Flogging gongs and seats in the Lords is illegal but the worst-case fall out is likely to be no more than a fine and a lot of political damage. Cooking the books is a more serious criminal matter, as the the many businessmen currently in gaol for returning deliberately inaccurate accounts can testify.

No wonder Blair and friends are going on the offensive against the police. The Daily Mail has been fed the story; ministers do not like the way they have been interviewed, the police have been leaking to the press, etc, etc. A former copper, Labour peer Lord Mackenzie, an ex-head of the Police Superintendents' Association, knows their game. He told the Mail on Sunday,

The common ploy by criminals through the ages is to get their retaliation in first and make a complaint against the police to divert the attention of the authorities and put the heat on the police...

But historically it rarely works. If Downing Street is considering attempting to do this they are making a catastrophic mistake. The police have to do their duty and must not be deterred from doing so.

Meanwhile, Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Yates, the officer in charge of the investigation is covering all bases. He is trying to rule out all innocent parties now so that nobody can suddenly fall on their sword for Blair later.The Sunday Telegraph has been given the story:

A source close to the inquiry said: "What Yates is trying to do is to ensure that no senior figure is able to take the rap for the nominations at a later stage in the inquiry, saving Tony Blair and his inner circle."

Mr Yates is understood to have been bruised by his experiences during the prosecution of Paul Burrell, former butler to Diana, Princess of Wales, whose trial for stealing some of her possessions collapsed after a dramatic intervention by the Queen. The Queen confirmed a claim by Mr Burrell that she had effectively given him permission to keep the possessions, a claim that was found not to have been investigated properly by the police inquiry, headed by Deputy Assistant Commissioner Yates.

The source said: "Yates is going to make damn sure nothing similar happens here. He does that by getting the Cabinet to deny, in writing, that they had anything to do with the nominations.

Tags: Cash for honours, Politics