by Daniel Korski | Jun 13, 2008 | Europe and Central Asia
As predicted here, Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty. Over on the ECFR website I have tried to lay out what I think European leaders should now do:
To keep all options open, the remaining eight countries that have yet to ratify the Lisbon Treaty should do so. This does not amount to ignoring the Irish, but keeps the door open for a number of different solutions and respects the democratic will of those countries who have ratified the country (however they have chosen to do so).
But perhaps more importantly, if it turns out that the Lisbon Treaty – however amended and with whatever concession offered to Ireland – is dead, European leaders should ensure that one of the main ideas behind the Treaty – to make the EU a more effective foreign policy player – is saved. Read how here.
by Daniel Korski | Jun 13, 2008 | Influence and networks
The resignation of David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, in protest over the 42-day detention vote in Parliament, was followed by a number of stories about his relationship with party leader David Cameron.
Both insist they’ve not fallen out and not rowed about policy. But once the bizarre specter of David Davis running for his own seat is over, I could not help but think that one narrative would remain; namely, that David Cameron runs the Tories with a tight-nit clique of friends, which outsiders – even Shadow Cabinet Ministers – find hard to penetrate.
My point here is not to accuse the Tory leader of being a toff. He may or may not be, but I don’t really care. Rather, my point is that at a time when the Prime Minister is clearly failing to deal with the complexity and speed of modern policy-making in part because he clings to a small tight-knit clique of allies, it would seem that the Tory leader risks doing much the same.
If true, this sits uneasily with the growing complexity and rapidity of contemporary policy challenges. In today’s world, policy-makers need to find ways to open policy processes, include stakeholders, marshal governmental and non-governmental resources etc. etc. It is not just, as it once was, important to avoid Groupthink and thus bad decisions; it is key to even get the necessary information for policy-making to take place on highly complex issues like energy, food prices, non-proliferation etc.
True, acusations of this kind of “cliqueness” dogged Tony Blair as well. Remember the Sofa? But by now, politicians should see that this is not only deeply unpopular, but bad for policy-making.
by David Steven | Jun 13, 2008 | Conflict and security, North America
I have nothing against John McCain. The man is a war hero. He has carved out a distinctive career as a political maverick. And his support for the surge in Iraq showed a willingness to stake out a position that, at the time, seemed politically suicidal.
But McCain keeps saying stupid things. In March, he wasn’t clear whether condoms prevent HIV (they don’t – but that’s another story), while ten days ago, when Obama finally slayed Grendel’s wife, he gave the worst speech I have ever seen. (Fox’s reaction was priceless, while you can watch McCain’s ‘lime green’ speech here if you missed it.)
This week, McCain has been in trouble for his assertion that bringing American troops home from Iraq was “not too important.” Here’s the full quote:
Interviewer: And a lot of people say the surge is now working.
McCain: Anybody who knows the facts on the ground will say that.
Interviewer: If it’s working Senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCain: No. (Shrug.) But that’s not too important. What’s important are the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine.
All this echoes his remarks from January, when in response to a question, he advocated keeping troops in Iraq for 100 years if casualties could be eliminated – a way of controlling “a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training and equipping and recruiting and motivating people every single day.”
Again, McCain took US troop presence in Korea and Japan as yardstick for what the US could achieve in Iraq, echoing the Bush administration’s desire for a network of permanent bases in the country.
What’s the problem with this vision? Apart from its improbability, there’s the evidence that suggests that an enduring US presence would be highly likely to provoke an equally enduring campaign of suicide bombing.
Someone should therefore ask McCain – how many suicide attacks does he want?
(more…)
by Charlie Edwards | Jun 12, 2008 | Conflict and security, UK
It’s not just the DUP who helped secure vote for the Counter-terrorism bill. From Revolts:
Of the 49 Labour backbenchers who voted against the Government in November 2005, when they went down to defeat on the Terrorism Bill, only 29 did so today. Perhaps even more strikingly, of the 48 backbenchers who the whips had identified as noes – in a list leaked to a Sunday paper back in April, just 25 voted against the government. And note this: of the 39 backbenchers who the whips had down as wavering then, just seven voted against the government. The main story will be the DUP what won it — but the extent to which the government dampened down troubles on their own benches is extraordinary. Champagne corks a-plenty tonight in the whips office – and the Home Office – we suspect.
According to Red Box the latest intelligence is:
Fact (will happen)
- Compensation: The Home Secretary is developing a compensation scheme, possibly £3,000 a day – Mohammed Sarwar
- Britain will not oppose sanctions to Cuba at EU foreign ministers meeting – Colin Burgen and Ian Gibson
- Flattering phone calls from Gordon – Labour MPs Austin Mitchell, Harry Cohen
Rumour (may happen)
- £225 million from water rates can stay in Northern Ireland, rather than be siphoned off by the Treasury – All 9 DUP votes
- Seat on the Intelligence and Security committee – All 9 DUP votes
- Private Members Bill for Plural Plaque – Michael Clapham
Fiction (wrong)
- Compensation scheme for miners’ knees – Yorkshire MPs in former mining seats
- Offer of knighthood for “Sir” Keith Vaz
- Calls to make the measures subject to judicial review – Some Labour MPs
by Alex Evans | Jun 12, 2008 | Global system, Influence and networks
If you pick up this week’s Economist and leaf through the classified ads, you’ll find this one: a job advert for the position of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. But just a second… surely the UN’s jobs website is here – rather than here, as linked to in the advert?
Ah, those cheeky scoundrels at Avaaz. The New York Times picks up the story:
The online advertisement that appeared Monday on The Economist magazine’s Web site seemed straightforward enough, seeking candidates for the position of United Nations high commissioner for human rights.
The advertisement, however, was a fake, a protest paid for by Avaaz.org, an online advocacy group. The organization is among a number of human rights organizations, United Nations diplomats and other watchdog groups critical of what they call the lack of transparency in selecting the next commissioner, one of the highest-profile and most delicate jobs in the United Nations hierarchy.
“It is a general problem that top appointments in the United Nations system are often made in back rooms behind closed doors where candidates who meet the lowest common denominator win,” said Ricken Patel, a Canadian who is the executive director of Avaaz.org. “A more open process requires bad candidates to face the test of public scrutiny.” The advertisement, which cost about $10,000, also ran in this week’s print edition of the magazine and carried a disclaimer identifying it as having been written and paid for by the group.
The UN isn’t happy:
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – The United Nations rejected on Tuesday as “absurd” and “offensive” allegations that it was being secretive in selecting a successor to its outspoken human rights chief, Louise Arbour.
