The Nether-World

My letter to Jack Straw

2006-08-01T18:40:00.000+01:00

Recently I made a pledge to write to Jack Straw calling him a cretin for the ridiculous statements he made about the service TheyWorkForYou.com. Well, the pledge was successful and I am now obliged to do what I said I'd do. So here is the letter I sent:

Dear Mr Straw,

I am writing to inform you of something that I think you need to be made aware of. You are a cretin. Your comments of 20 July 2006 in which you criticise the excellent service provided by TheyWorkForYou.com are counter-productive and deeply hypocritical coming from a government that acknowledges that people are becoming increasingly disenfranchised from the political process.

Governments work for the people and those people are entitled to know what is being done in their name. We have frequently heard the term "Open Government" coming from New Labour. What on earth is wrong with people wanting to know about debates or how MPs vote on certain issues or even how to get in touch with their MP? These are important services. In a democracy, representatives of the people need to be held to account. I realise that this has become an unfashionable concept over the last nine years, but it is still an important part of democracy. And while this government is bombing so many people in the name of democracy then I think it should be setting a better example.

Your administration has championed the need for league tables in our public services and yet you seem reluctant for people to know how how well our representatives perform. Government departments should be compelled to answer questions from the electorate and if there is a backlog or a log jam then it is for the Government to improve matters, not us to stop asking.

Having said that, I applaud your belated statements about Israel's "disproportionate" response in the current conflict in Lebanon even though they don't go far enough and apparently took Kofi Annan to prompt them. Now if we could just have a little more honesty regarding extraordinary rendition...

Yours sincerely

Davide Simonetti

http://nether-world.blogspot.com/

I Wonder if I'll get a reply.

Tags: Jack Straw, Nu Labour, Democracy

Kofi Annan prompted Jack Straw’s revolt

2006-08-01T06:09:00.000+01:00

Jack Straw’s comments about Israel’s attacks on Lebanese civilians being “disproportionate” may have been made after a call from the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan who is exasperated with Tony Blair’s refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire even after the massacre at Qana which killed 60 civilians, 37 of them children.

Last week Jack Straw told Muslim community leaders in his Blackburn constituency:

“Disproportionate action only escalates an already dangerous situation.”

“One of many serious concerns I have is that the continuation of such tactics by the Israelis could further destabilise the already fragile Lebanese nation. If you want to go for Hezbollah, go for Hezbollah, not the whole Lebanese nation,”
Source

His statement added to a growing chorus of discontent in Blair’s cabinet over the Prime Minister’s refusal to criticise Israeli atrocities, his reluctance to call for an immediate ceasefire, and his overly close relationship with the neo conservative President of the United States. The news that Jack Straw’s outburst may have been influenced by Kofi Annan further increases Blair’s isolation as it means the Secretary General of the UN went over the heads of the Prime Minister and his Foreign Secretary and appealed directly to the Leader of the House of Commons and former Foreign Secretary.

Tony Blair's isolation over the Middle East crisis deepened last night after it emerged that Kofi Annan privately told Jack Straw of his anger at Britain's refusal to call for an immediate ceasefire.

The UN secretary general's office denied last night that he had urged Mr Straw to put pressure on Mr Blair to abandon his close alliance with President George W Bush over not condemning Israeli military action.

But two days later, Mr Straw, who was foreign secretary until May, issued a statement condemning some Israeli strikes as "disproportionate". His criticism led to a major Cabinet split over Middle East policy.

According to well-placed sources, Mr Annan rang Mr Straw, now Leader of the Commons, last Wednesday - just hours after four UN peacekeepers were killed by Israeli action in southern Lebanon.

Claims that the UN chief was effectively fomenting revolt in Mr Blair's Cabinet against his decision to stick closely to Mr Bush and refuse to call for an immediate ceasefire will infuriate the Prime Minister.

Mr Annan's office insisted last night that he talked directly to Mr Blair, not behind his back.

However, Mr Annan's decision to talk privately to Mr Straw will undermine confidence in Margaret Beckett, who replaced him as Foreign Secretary. In a series of bad-tempered media performances, she has shown signs of mounting tension with Mr Blair over his approach to the crisis.
Source

Margaret Beckett has already shown herself to be way out of her depth in this crisis and has been unable to influence the Prime Minister despite her private reservations and warnings to Mr Blair about a potential tragedy. She has stuck to Blair’s line publicly but has performed badly on television and radio interviews and not made many friends amongst her foreign counter-parts. Beckett’s lacklustre performance as Foreign Secretary weakens Blair even more at a crucial time and further illustrates the mistakes he made in his last cabinet reshuffle.

Last night a former minister told The Times that Mrs Beckett’s failure to make her mark illustrated that Tony Blair made a mistake by appointing her to the post. “She hasn’t had a very good war, has she?” the former minister said. “It is an incredibly hard position, incredibly hard.

A Foreign Secretary in that situation has to be very quick-witted in finding metaphors and using a turn of phrase. Margaret has had 25 years in politics. Can you think in all those years of one memorable phrase she has used? Was she the right person for the job in the reshuffle? I think the answer is no.”
Source

Meanwhile in the Middle East things are getting worse. After the false optimism of a potential agreement heralded by Condoleezza Rice, Israel humiliated her by announcing an expansion of its ground offensive with Ehud Olmert ruling out any prospect of a ceasefire as soon as Condi left for Washington. This should have been expected as Israel cannot continue its aerial attacks on civilians without further criticism and another Qana would cause even American support to dry up. Israel seems to have been given another week to continue its slaughter rather than the 14 days it asked for. The problem for Israel is that in recent decades it has not had to face an opponent that can actually shoot back. Nearly all of its attacks have been on civilians or militants armed with little more than stones, Kalashnikovs or the odd RPG hence its preference for flattening villages full of cowering women and children from the air. Israel ignored its own declaration of a suspension of aerial attacks in Southern Lebanon and has continued to bomb the region as its troops struggle to take the smallest of villages.

Far from weakening Hezbollah, the Israeli attacks have given the party widespread support in Lebanon and the wider Arab world while Israel, Britain and America are now completely isolated in the international community. Iran and Syria on the other hand have raised their profiles and are now entering into the diplomatic arena which is precisely what America and Britain were trying to prevent.

In other news, Gordon Brown, who as usual is nowhere to be found when there is a crisis, is said to be “fuming” that Blair and Beckett have not forged a close relationship with Ehud Olmert.

Last year Brown met Ehud Olmert, then finance minister of Israel, now prime minister, and urged senior government figures to pay attention to him. Brown is angry that Blair and Margaret Beckett, the foreign secretary, are said to have little or no relationship with Olmert.

“Gordon is fuming that no one operating at a senior level is dealing with the Israelis,” said a source close to the chancellor. “He has been warning people for months that this guy (Olmert) was likely to be the next prime minister once Ariel Sharon became ill.”
Source

Gordon Brown has a close relationship with the Israeli leader and presumably supports the current rampage he is on. In the current climate this is not going to help Britain’s international standing should he become the next Prime Minister. So far the only MP to offer an alternative direction for Labour is John McDonnell. Although he seems unlikely at the moment to win the leadership of the party, his ideas are much more in tune with traditional Labour values. You can read his opinions on the Middle East crisis and Britain’s complicity in the slaughter in his blog.

Tags: Lebanon, Israel, Blair, Bush, UK Politics

What was Jack Straw's crime?

2006-05-06T06:26:00.000+01:00

One of the more confusing aspects of Tony Blair's smokescreen Cabinet reshuffle was the demotion of Jack Straw from Foreign Secretary to Leader of the House of Commons. We all know why Charles Clarke had to go, but what did Jack Straw do to provoke the wrath of Blair?

There has been plenty of speculation. Some pundits think that Jack Straw was becoming too close to Gordon Brown, others think that perhaps his 'special relationship' with Condoleezza Rice was grabbing too many headlines. Neither of these reasons seem to convey the whole story. I think that the real reason has more to do with his seeming lack of enthusiasm for another war. It was Jack Straw who famously said that an attack on Iran would be 'inconceivable'.

"I don't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran, full stop."

Only last month said that the reports of a possible a nuclear strike in Iran were 'completelely nuts'. Evidently Blair begs to differ. If you want a good indication of the direction we are headed with Blair's new Cabinet, then the removal of Jack Straw and his replacement, Margaret Beckett, who voted very strongly for the Iraq war, is quite revealing. It would seem that I am not the only one thinking along these lines.

In other news, George Bush seems to be 'thinking' that we are now in World War III. Maybe that explains why he wants the USA to have the capacity to make 125 nuclear bombs a year while trying to stop other countries developing nuclear technology.

Tags: Blair, Nu Labour, Iran

Jack Straw is 'Completely Nuts'

2006-04-15T12:06:00.000+01:00

Someone is not telling the truth, either Britain is planning to take part in an attack on Iran or it isn't. The scale of Britain's involvement might be debatable, but there really is no middle ground here. Jack Straw's statements, and what appears to happening on the ground, are simply incompatible.

British officers took part in a US war game aimed at preparing for a possible invasion of Iran, despite repeated claims by the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, that a military strike against Iran is inconceivable.
Full Guardian Article

That's strange, only last week the Foreign Secretary was telling us that reports of an impending attack on Iran were "completely nuts". So what are we supposed to believe here, Jack Straw's incredible assertions, or the reports from the Ministry of Defense and a seasoned journalist who has a proven track record of being correct? Here is a little clue:

"I don't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran, full stop." Jack Straw November 2004

That sounds pretty unambiguous to me, and yet we can't ignore all the evidence that plainly contradicts his statements. In other words, we can't all be completely nuts.

Britain pushes for military option to restrain Tehran
The Times - March 22, 2006
Government in secret talks about strike against Iran
The Sunday Telegraph - April 2 2006
THE IRAN PLANS
The New Yorker - April 8 2006
Britain took part in mock Iran invasion
The Guardian - April 15, 2006

If it isn't the rest of the world that is completely nuts, then the only other explanation is that it must be Jack Straw, along with Tony Blair, George Bush and the rest of the neo-con cabal of war mongers.

Tags: Iran, Britain, New Labour

Condom Rice?

2006-04-02T08:15:00.000+01:00

Can this be true?

As he introduced his guest, the Foreign Secretary held up a copy of a local newspaper and read out the headline: "Condom….er, Condi Comes to the Centre of the World".

It has become quite apparent that Jack Straw and Condoleezza Rice are smitten with each other, but this Freudian slip, if true and not an April Fools joke, is hilarious.

It has now emerged that the happy couple have slipped off to Baghdad, presumably to get some peace and quiet after having to avoid all those noisy protesters.

*UPDATE*

When I wrote this piece, I naturally speculated that this might be an April Fools joke. However, The Telegraph has published an update maintaining that the story is indeed true. To prove it they have an MP3 of that part of Jack Straw's speech where he makes his slip of of the tongue. I have just heard it and sure enough... You can read the update and download the MP3 here.

Tags: Britain Iraq

Planning the ‘Inconceivable’

2006-04-02T06:20:00.000+01:00

"I don't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran, full stop." Jack Straw November 2004

In November 2004, Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw said that a US led attack on Iran was “inconceivable”. He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme "I don't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran, full stop".

Since then the rhetoric against Iran has been ratcheted up at an ever increasing rate, and still the UK position on attacking Iran has been ambiguous both, criticising Iran on its decision to develop nuclear technology as is its right, and seeming to be reluctant to commit to the possibility of armed conflict if it can’t get its way diplomatically.

This façade of reluctance is crumbling now in the face of evidence that the UK is actively planning an attack on Iran with the USA and possibly Israel.

In March The Times published an article entitled “Britain pushes for military option to restrain Tehran”

In a confidential letter obtained by The Times, a leading British diplomat outlines a strategy for winning Russian and Chinese support by early summer for a so-called Chapter VII resolution demanding that Iran cease its nuclear activities.

If the Government in Tehran refused to comply with such a resolution, the UN Security Council would be legally compelled to enforce it

Full article

Now it seems that Britain is going a stage further by actively planning a series of air strikes on Iran. The Sunday Telegraph is reporting that the Government is to hold a secret meeting at the Ministry of Defence to discuss an attack on Iran.

The Government is to hold secret talks with defence chiefs tomorrow to discuss possible military strikes against Iran.

A high-level meeting will take place in the Ministry of Defence at which senior defence chiefs and government officials will consider the consequences of an attack on Iran.

Full article

This is, of course, completely contrary to Jack Straw’s statement in 2004, and comes at the same time as the Government has finally been forced to admit that the July 7th bombings in London did, in fact, have something to do with the war in Iraq, a reversal of Tony Blair’s original assertion. Presumably the subsequent terrorism that will ensue following an attack on Iran will have nothing whatsoever to do with that attack, until once again Blair is forced to recant.

Tags: Britain Iran