David Cameron: the Conservative Security Policy Group.

On Friday, in a light-hearted post, I wrote,

Meanwhile the serious part of the Conservative Party shakes its collective head and waits for Cameron's next hostage to fortune.

Previously Cameron's stupidities have been harmless fun, at worst electoral disaster. Today he has moved onto a new level of misjudgement, as unacceptable as it is surprising, in a senior politician. Even in my most cynical moments, I never expected Cameron to start playing party politics with UK security policy at a time when British troops are in action and the country is possibly facing an immediate serious threat.

Following the publication of the Conservative Party's "Interim Position Paper of the National and International Security Policy Group", tomorrows headlines will probably be that Cameron blames the invasion of Iraq for the terrorist threat to the UK. The International Herald Tribune and the Guardian have already picked up an AP report of the story. Expect more of the same and inevitably damage to the UK's reputation abroad.

The Interim Paper can be downloaded here in pdf form. Amongst the criticisms of British policy and anti-American sentiments, for me, the following quote (page 5) stands out:

Management of our key relationships however requires attention. We need to recognise that for our longstanding positioning to continue to serve UK interests and for the UK to avoid becoming merely an echo of American policy, allies and partners must share our aspirations for a functioning alliance and for close, cooperative US/European relations. Not all European partners do to the same extent. Nor will they unless we work at it. The paradox is that unless the UK wishes effectively to retire from the world, in which case a context for action does not matter, British freedom of manoeuvre lies in the existence rather than the absence of this framework. The drubbing that key relationships have taken over Iraq has served the interests only of our (collective) enemies. And anti-Americanism, which polls show has risen especially markedly in the UK, is a self inflicted wound. But it is also a reflection of the discomfort felt in this country with recent policy outcomes.

The debate over the UK's policy interests into relation to the US took place immediately after 9/11 and, as I have written before,Tony Blair rightly concluded that UK interests were the exactly same as those of the US, as enunciated by President Bush. It was not, therefore, "an echo of American policy" that led the British into Afghanistan and Iraq with the US but a transatlantic convergence of principles and national interests. Other European countries took a different view but that is a matter for them. From a British point of view, given NATO's performance in Afghanistan it is obvious who are the UK's most reliable allies, and they are not situated in Europe.

I would say that currently western anti-Americanism is not as bad as it was in the years of President Regan and the Cruise Missile debates. Then we had a Conservative leader in Mrs Thatcher who fought such nonsense, not pandered to it, reacting to opinion polls by seeking votes in such meaningless concepts as "frameworks" and "(collective) enemies". What is a "(collective) enemy" anyway - a kulak?

Where is the "drubbing" Cameron? Yes, there is serious problems remaining in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, but as I have demonstrated more than once this week already, progress, however painful and slow, is being made in the right direction. Not that such things seem to interest Cameron. If he lambasted the government for its operational manning and equipment failures, Cameron would have a reasonable point; however, he seems to show little interest in such things, preferring instead to launch a full scale party political attack which can do nothing to help the situation. Now is not the time for a responsible politician to engage in such things.

19.12.06 @7:35 - minor edits applied for clarification.

Tags: Conservative Party, David Cameron, Foreign Policy

al Qaeda is coming soon.

The current edition of Newsweek has a story that al Qaeda is using its safe bases in North Waziristan, Pakistan to train a 12-man team of terrorists in preparation for a strike in the West. The putative mass murderers are said to include a couple of Norwegian Muslims, an Aussie and 9 British passport holders.

As Newsweek points out, MI5 is aware of this type of threat but there is so many suspect individuals travelling regularly between Pakistan and the UK that it is almost inevitable that a few will slip under the British and Pakistani security services' radar. It is well worth reading the full article.

It looks like the recent warnings from the Home secretary and the head of MI5 might well be fully justified.

Cap doffed to Hindustan Times.

Newsweek Permalink.

Tags: al Qaeda, Islamic terrorism, War on Terror.

Sergeant Steven Roberts.

The inquest into the death of Sergeant Steven Roberts in Iraq during 2003 has ended with the coroner returning what is called a "narrative verdict". My lay understanding is that it means the coroner produces "...a short, factual statement setting out the circumstances of the death if this more fairly and accurately reflects how the deceased came to his or her death" than the other options available.

Bluntly, the finding is that Sgt. Roberts died because he was amongst the unluckiest of the 2,000 troops who went into Iraq without the best available armoured protection because of shortages of a £167 worth piece of kit. The Times quotes the coroner, Andrew Walker:

"To send soldiers into a combat zone without the appropriate basic equipment is, in my view, unforgivable and inexcusable and represents a breach of trust that the soldiers have in those in Government," he said, recording a narrative verdict in the death of Roberts.

"This Enhanced Combat Body Armour was a basic piece of protective equipment. I have heard justification and excuse and I put these to one side as I remind myself that Sergeant Roberts lost his life because he did not have that basic piece of equipment.

"Sergeant Roberts’s death was as a result of delay and serious failures in the acquisition and support chain that resulted in a significant shortage within his fighting unit of enhanced combat body armour, none being available for him to wear."

Other reports from the BBC and the Daily Telegraph.

I will update this post with the formal inquest verdict if it becomes available.

Tags: Iraq, Steve Roberts

Opreation Baaz Tsuka: 3: ISAF statement.

The ISAF has issued a statement on the early progress of Operation Baaz Tsuka, the anti-Taliban operation in Kandahar, Afghanistan:

As Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and ISAF continue their movement in and around Zahre, Panjwaii and westerly districts of Kandahar province [the Zahre-Panjawii area is roughly 25-30 miles south west of Kandahar city].

During the operations, ANSF and ISAF have discovered large weapons caches, including mortars, dynamite and anti-personnel mines. These caches will be destroyed.

Local village tribal elders have been receptive to ANSF and ISAF taking up positions in the westerly districts of Kandahar Province and have encountered little to no resistance from insurgents.

Since the start of manoeuvres today in Zahre District, there has been one armored vehicle damaged due to an IED strike resulting in three minor injuries to ISAF troops.

South of Panjwaii, ISAF patrols discovered groups of local Afghans displaced from their homes by the Taliban. They have been given essential aid and identified for further relief.

The armoured vehicle attack was probably this incident, from the Washington Post.

Elsewhere in Kandahar, in what seems to be a separate incident, as the Canadian Globe and Mail reports, there was a clash between coalition forces and Taliban at Sperwan Gar, the scene of a notable engagement last October.

Tags: Afghanistan, ISAF, Operation Baaz Tsulka.

Tony Blair in Iraq

On his historic mission to secure peace in our sometime for the Middle East, the Prime Minister has taken the opportunity to visit British troops in Iraq. According to Downing Street, he is"four-square behind Iraq".

He said that British forces would remain in Iraq "until the job is done" and that the handover of power to Iraqi forces in Basra was "going well."

"Our policy is that as the Iraqi forces are capable of taking over control of the city of Basra so our forces stand back and go to a support role."

Both the BBC and the Independent focus on Blair's remarks to soldiers that the long term ambition to reduce troops numbers should not be read as as a change of policy.:

...the Prime Minister told an audience of about 300 troops from the 19 Light Brigade: "This isn't a change of our policy. Don't be under any doubt at all. British troops will remain until the job is done.

"Our country and countries like it are having to rediscover what it means to fight for what we believe in. This is real conflict, real battle, and it is a different kind of enemy - not fighting a state, but fighting a set of ideas and ideologies, a group of extremists who share the same perspective.

All this seems to be in accord with the Defence secretary's Chatham House speech, in which Des Browne indicated that Basra is the key and that, whatever the Foreign Office might say about a spring withdrawal, British policy is to stand by our allies and the Iraqi people until the task is completed. So despite the major concerns over the armed forces' manning and equipment, for once, at least, Blair deserves some credit for taking the right, as opposed to the easy, option.

Not that Blair is getting much credit from the British press. At the time of posting, except for a brief negative reference in a leader, the Guardian is ignoring Blair in Iraq. In both an article and a leader, the Daily Telegraph puts a negative spin on the story; whilst the Times reports on Blair in Iraq in the context of the headline "Blair snubbed by Bush move to send more troops to Iraq". How they work that out is beyond me. I think the Thunderer must be confusing Blair and the MoD with the appeasers at the Foreign Office.

Tags: Iraq, Tony Blair

My Lord! John Stevens' reports.

Lord John Stevens used to be a humble policeman, no doubt underpaid and overworked as he plodded the beat. Not any more. By the time he had risen through the ranks to become Metropolitan Police Commissioner, (London's Police Chief), he had arse-licked enough politicians to become a Lord on his retirement (without having to pay cash) in January 2005. Since then he has developed a taste for inquiries that are as pointless as they are expensive.

Last week he published his report which decisively proved that Lady Diana, Princess of Wales was not assassinated by either MI5 or the CIA. If anybody wants to see what the taxpayers got for their £3.69m (about $7M), the full 871 page pdf version can be downloaded from here.

Next up this week is his discount report into allegations of corruption in 39 soccer transfers. It is said to have cost the soccer authorities only about £800,000.

What next? Lord Stevens is a natural choice for inquires into both the Al-Yamamah and Cash for Honours investigations.

UPDATE1: 20.12.06

The BBC has reports and links relating to Steven's soccer inquiry, which has been published. As far as I can see, Stevens' most important claim from the inquiry is his expense forms. And I've just seen this in the Times:

Stevens and his Quest team of investigators would continue to pursue at least 8 uncooperative agents but under a new inquiry with a new frame of reference.

That should keep the wolf from the door until a bigger, badder, better, more profitable inquiry comes along.

UPDATE2: 21.12.06

The latest from Stevens is that he has passed a dossier relating to his inquiry to the Serious Fraud Office. For any soccer fans straying onto here, it might be helpful to observe that the SFO is not part of the police, rather it is a government department, and a completely useless one at that. Think of a civil service version of the Keystone Cops. All those concerned can sleep soundly tonight.

Tags: Lord Stevens

Senator McCain wastes his breath.

John McCain urges NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan.

The French reply.

Do not look to the UK, Senator, the British army cannot afford even a jump for the next five or so years.

Tags: Afghanistan, British army, Defence, France, NATO

Blair: Get your panzers off our lawns.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, Muhammed Abdul Bari, the head of the Muslim Council of Britain thinks that the British government should stop causing terrorism by behaving like Nazis towards Muslims. Perhaps they will , as soon as Islamic terrorists stop randomly killing and maiming innocent individuals. Addressing MPs at the All Party Group on Race and Community, Bari could not manage even the remotest trace of condemnation for his co-religionist murderers.

Mr Bari also rejected Tony Blair's call for Muslims to do more to fight terrorism. He put the responsibility squarely at the door of the Government.

He said: "The attempt to place the problem on one doorstep is unfair and counter-productive." He blamed the "relentless barrage" of anti-terrrorism laws, labelling them "hastily formulated responses masquerading as policy".

Blair in jackboots? Strange fantasy.

Tags: Abdul Bari, Islam, Muslim Council of Great Britian, War on Terror

Baaz Tsuka 2: Afghan army takes on the Taliban in Kandahar.

In one of the earliest dispatches from Operation Baaz Tsuka, the Sunday Telegraph reports on what should be a formidable combination of the Afghan army and the Canucks taking on the Taliban in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

As with my previous link to Bill Roggio in Iraq, it is encouraging to see the local army able to take more responsibility.

Tags: Afghanistan, Operation Baaz Tsuka.

al-Yamamah: unhappy days at the SFO .

Yet more on the al-Yamamah scandal. Paranoia in the in the Serious Fraud Squad? Maybe. According to the Independent, SFO officers investigating al-Yamamah fear somebody bugged their offices.

One senior figure who had been helping the SFO said the investigation's security had been repeatedly compromised. "I was told by detectives that the probe was being bugged. They had reached this conclusion because highly confidential information on the inquiry had been reaching outside parties."

So now we know, it was a bug and not either a leak or a corrupt officer selling information. I think I will ask the fairies at the bottom of the garden what they think.

The SFO is still complaining to anybody who will listen. The Sunday Telegraph and the Sunday Times each lend a not overly sympathetic ear.

In the Sunday Times, Simon Jenkins has a go at the Attorney Genereal on this and on cash for honours.

Tags: al Yamamah

Bill Roggio on patrol with the Iraqi army.

Another dispatch from Bill Roggio of The Fourth Rail, this time on patrol with the Iraqi army in Fallujah.

The importance of local knowledge caught my eye.

The Iraqi soldier's ability to develop local intelligence networks, understand the language and culture and know the lay of the land far outweighs any tactical deficiencies they may have. “They can tell who's not from the area – who's from Mosul, or Tikrit or Ramadi – just by their accent, and they can tell when someone's lying,” said [US marine] Cpl Burcell.

I hope I am not misreading Roggio but, once again, but I get the impression from a report by somebody actually on the ground that, however slowly and painfully, Iraq is moving in a positive direction.

Tags: Bill Roggio, Fallujah, Iraq, The Fourth Rail

Of cash and dishonour amongst friends.

Loyalty can be a wonderful thing but it is rarely as entertaining as disloyalty. The headlines tell the story. The Sunday Telegraph goes with "Blair refuses to back Levy in Labour's cash for honours scandal", whilst the Sunday Mail sticks with "Knives are out for Levy as Blair rift grows." As I said again yesterday, Levy has made clear he is not going to be a fall guy and Blair seems to be getting rattled at the very thought of what Lord Cashpoint might say in court under oath. The Telegraph has a candidate for Lie of the Day,

Mr Blair is reported to have contradicted Lord Levy's written account to police when he was questioned at No 10. The Prime Minister is said to have told detectives he did not have "full knowledge" of the loans or the nominations, while the peer had claimed Mr Blair did know of his dealings with lenders.

The Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party had no knowledge of the loans and associated nominations? I hope Yates of the Yard has not spilt his coffee reading that one.

The intrepid AC Yates is still going. According to the Sunday Times, next up to have his collar felt is Jonathan Powell, the head clerk at Downing Street. It seems the Yard want to discuss a few emails.

Blair has told the police that individuals were nominated for honours for services to Labour. No, say the honoured ingrates, it was for " public service to the nation." The Independent says it has seen copies of secret Downing Street papers which prove the honoured ingrates are correct. I think the Indy's point is that Blair lied to the police. All the story proves is that Blair is an equal opportunities liar and certain rich businessmen have a high opinion of themselves.

Finally, for any fellow sad cases still enjoying the story, the Scotsman has a list of potential second time interviewees and names Detective Chief Inspector Graeme McNulty as the policeman who conducted the historic interview at Downing Street. Congratulations to DCI McNulty.

Sunday morning bonus @ 07:50: Andrew Rawnsley, who appears to have resigned from the Blair Fan Club, gets sanctimonious in the Observer. I just love it when journalists go all hypocritical on us. In the Sunday Times, Simon Jenkins has a go at the Attorney General on this (page 2 of the article) and al Yamamah.

Tags: Blair, Cash for honours