Three Thousand Versts of Loneliness

There won't be too many posts on the blog this week, but I will briefly draw your attention to another Belfast Telegraph article , which considers the Megrahi mess.  The edit lost a little of the thrust of the original, so the text below is a little different to the published column.   I consider the chain of events which set in train the bomber's release and conclude: [It's} Hardly surprising that after the release took place last August, opponents alleged Labour was secretly delighted.  The party had secured its preferred outcome without getting its hands dirty.  A nationalist Scottish Executive, flexing its muscles and styling itself a ’government’, was more than happy to boast that it had reached its decision independently. When Kenny MacAskill appeared in front of the world’s press to deliver a crowing speech about the unique ’humanity of the Scottish people’, he didn’t expect that his ruling would cause the SNP to crash in the polls.  Nor could he anticipate that a f

I have registered my apprehension, on this blog, that the ECR group, which the Conservatives have helped constitute in the European Parliament, contains unpleasant, populist nationalists from the former Soviet bloc. I believe that the Tories should have considered more closely the character of the various organisations with which they were about to associate in Europe. It is true, however, that the groups within the European Parliament are, by necessity, alliances of convenience, forged between parties on the basis of the most amorphous common principles. Such is the character of EU politics. MEPs within a group, and the parties from which they are drawn, might share very broad objectives or a common outlook as regards the European Parliament. They certainly do not, by anyone’s understanding, endorse the domestic platforms of each of their groupmates. Which is why I believe that, the ECR having already been formed, Conservatives do not need to defend the Latvian Fatherland and Fr

Regular readers will scarcely be flabbergasted to learn that I welcome Barack Obama’s decision to scrap a controversial missile shield in central and eastern Europe. A great deal of hysterical nonsense has been written to accompany the decision, which has been presented as capitulation to Vladimir Putin, or abandonment of plucky allies, only recently freed from Russia’s yoke. All of which rather undermines the contention that the shield, which was to include bases in Poland and the Czech Republic, was designed to prevent aggression from Iran and should not concern the Kremlin. The original scheme was endorsed by three discredited governments, in Washington, Warsaw and Prague respectively. Despite the ‘abandoned friends’ narrative, the intention to park missile silos and radar installations on Polish and Czech territory was unpopular amongst the wider population. Now the realist approach to foreign policy is more accurately reflected in government. It is no accident that comment

The anniversary of last summer’s war between Georgia and Russia has formed a pretext for predictable anti-Russian posturing. Politicians in Britain and elsewhere have been quick to rationalise their initial reactions to the conflict, despite the improvement in tone which Barack Obama’s arrival at the White House has precipitated between western governments and the Kremlin during the last six months. However, despite the residual, reflexive Russophobia which informs much of this analysis, it has generally been expressed in terms which are distinctly more temperate than the (empty) sabre rattling we witnessed last August. Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, is a particularly blinkered critic of Moscow, and compulsively meddles in the affairs of sovereign states. But he met the anniversary of Saakashvili’s invasion with an uncharacteristically muted statement which welcomed President Medvedev’s call for a ‘new security architecture’ in Europe. The Conservative shadow defence minister,

Nearly a year after Russia intervened to put an end to Georgian military adventurism in South Ossetia the Daily Telegraph is still filling its leaders with condemnation of the Kremlin’s ‘shameful invasion’. It is almost as if the paper does not want to let its readers forget the painfully simplistic editorial line it took when war flared in the Caucasus. It is like a dog leading its owner back to vomit. Only the most partisan commentators now persist in the illusion that Georgia was blameless last summer. And the Telegraph’s nasty, sneering piece is nothing if not partisan. It lists triumphantly what it perceives to be Russia’s weaknesses, then with jaw dropping condescension claims, ‘we take no pleasure in pointing this out, for the achievements of the Russian people are exceptional: their literature is justifiably renowned and their stubborn heroism was indispensable to the defeat of Hitler’. Those Russkis are a bad lot, but still, soon there’ll be a lot fewer of them and you’v

Barack Obama is in Russia today. Thus a proliferation of articles and editorials urging the US President not to trust perfidious, semi-Asiatic barbarians adorn the newspapers. Predictably. In contrast, few media outlets chose to cover an assassination attempt last month on reforming Ingushetia president, Yunusbek Yevkurov, which constitutes part of a reinvigorated Islamist campaign in the Russian Caucasus. Encouraged by Dmitri Medvedev, Yevkurov has implemented a regime built on principles of glasnost in Russia’s most dangerous region. The terrorist attack was targeted very deliberately at a force for normalisation and transparency, which Wahhabi militants wish to undermine. Fewer reporters still have highlighted the ongoing struggle for democracy in Georgia and the government’s repressive tactics against the country’s opposition. But with Obama in Moscow to meet his Kremlin counterpart, all the clichés about a totalitarian Russian regime, intent on snuffing out democracy al

‘Three Thousand Versts’ has previously touched upon a new willingness within Georgia to question its government’s military adventurism in South Ossetia. The Caucasian state’s last ambassador to Moscow has been one high profile critic of President Saakashvili’s regime and its belligerent attitude towards Russia. In an article on Open Democracy, Ambassador Kitsmarishvili argues that Tbilisi should follow Barack Obama’s example and seek to ‘reset’ its relations with the Kremlin. The pertinent question for Georgians is whether their government will eventually replicate the new trend toward diplomacy emanating from the White House. If it does not, the popular clamour against Saakashvili will surely continue to grow. Otherwise Georgia risks becoming increasingly isolated, as the international community draws the conclusion that its authorities ‘prefer the language of force, pressure and confrontation between the superpowers’. With bilateralism and diplomacy becoming the preferred means

Overwhelming attention, this week, has been focused on the G20 summit and the argument for international fiscal stimulus . Although Gordon Brown might like us to believe that the resultant communiqué will offer a blueprint capable of saving the world, ‘sherpas’ and officials are even now expending enormous intellectual resources seeking a form of words ambiguous enough to satisfy widely diverging views of the financial crisis. These meetings may represent impressive showcases of draftsmanship by world political elites, but contending domestic agendas dictate that their planet changing potential is grossly exaggerated. Remember Gleneagles, when Tony Blair oversaw an end to African poverty? That is not to say that important developments are not possible when international political power is suddenly concentrated in one venue. It is just that real progress is unlikely to be reflected in the nuances of an agreed text and it is not necessarily framed by the official agenda of the summi

To follow up a little on the piece below, it seems the US under Obama is keen to direct NATO policy towards re-engagement with Russia. Work in this regard had already begun with an informal meeting of the NATO-Russia Council. As its foreign ministers met today , with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in attendance for the first time, the alliance pledged to recommence the work of the Council on a formal basis. Predictably there were differences of opinion, and Clinton described a ‘vigorous discussion’ on Russia. But what is particularly significant is that the Americans are no longer aligned with the more belligerent anti-Russian voices. Indeed the US joined Germany, traditionally less frosty in its relationship with Moscow, and tabled a motion calling for Russia to become, “equal partners in areas of common interest”. Predictably David Miliband struck a less conciliatory note. But if the temperature of Russia-NATO relations begins to cool he will be forced to temper his anti

Given that the United States claims the proposed missile ‘defence shield’ it intends to construct in eastern Europe is designed to protect it from any possible Iranian nuclear threat, it should make perfect sense to abandon the project, if that threat dissipates. A letter from Barack Obama’s administration has suggested that Washington would be prepared to axe its plans, if Russia agrees not to assist Iran in its attempts to develop ballistic and nuclear weapons. President Medvedev response to the speculation has been cautious, but it does not preclude the possibility that a delicate diplomatic dance might achieve the required outcome. Undoubtedly any understanding which was reached would entail an easing of tension between the Kremlin and the White House. The Russians remain understandably wary of being seen to be manoeuvred by the Americans, but this offers both sides a chance to be seen to cooperate without conceding anything particularly valuable. As a Comment is Free piece p

Thanks to Brian from Burke’s Corner who pointed me toward a couple of articles carrying quotes from Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s ambassador to NATO and former leader of the erstwhile Rodina party, which is now subsumed in the Just Russia coalition. Rogozin is an articulate proponent of the Russian position and he is particularly persuasive when he argues common interests between the EU, US and Russia comprise a sum greater than those matters which divide the three. “We suggest principles that are really hard to object to. Who is going to deny that security should be equal, indispensable and indivisible for all? Who could be against demilitarizing the entire centre of the European continent using military force solely to defend our common borders in the Pacific area? Who could be against ruling out military planning, especially nuclear planning, against each other? These things are totally reasonable; it’s a new world outlook. It’s a new vision of collective security for everyone. The

Blogging might be a little slow and brief this week due to the encroachment of real life. Rather than comment extensively on Jonathan Steele’s CIF piece on Georgia I will simply commend it to your attention. Suffice to say that Steele detects a change in attitude toward President Mikheil Saakashvili military adventurism. Georgians are increasingly cynical about a head of state feted by American neo-cons. Again, Barack Obama’s arrival at the White House offers an opportunity to reappraise Washington’s unequivocal support for a regime with dubious credentials as regards democracy.

Encouraging news that NATO’s relationship with Russia might be normalising in the aftermath of war in South Ossetia. Radio Free Europe reports the first meeting of the Russia NATO Council since the alliance suspended contact citing Russia’s ‘disproportionate response' to events in the Caucasus. The Kremlin’s envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said ‘the ice is thawing’. Russia is keen to cooperate as regards transport routes to Afghanistan. It sees continued insurrection there as a threat to the stability of its borders with Central Asia. Treating Moscow with respect and consideration affords opportunities to build meaningful partnership. Barack Obama has a window of opportunity to pursue constructive policy toward Russia. An early meeting with President Medvedev would offer a chance for Obama to demonstrate good faith.

Examining the substance of Barack Obama’s rhetoric, an article in January’s Prospect noted that, not only is there nothing particularly audacious about hope, but if the formulation were reversed to read, ‘the hope of audacity’, it would make little difference to either the meaning or content of the phrase. It was an observation which returned to me as I listened to Obama’s inauguration speech yesterday. The address was not to my taste. Upholstered by metaphor and platitude, it sounded like narrative from a Hollywood movie. American presidents frequently do. There were traces of a significant message, but it was difficult to disentangle from high flown, meaningless speechifying. Burke’s Corner takes the US to task for ignoring its own Lockean myth in its inauguration ceremony. It forms less a celebration of sovereignty which rests with the people than a quasi monarchical coronation. Obama is elected whereas our own head of state is not, but it is hard to disagree that this disti

At this time of year there are normally a plethora of retrospectives musing on the happenings of the previous 12 months. The credit crunch and the election of Barack Obama are two global events which will probably dominate most news and politics based assessments of 2008. There was also the small matter of a brief war which flared in the Caucasus following Georgian Prime Minister Mikhail Saaskashvili’s military adventurism. In British politics David Davis won admiration for the courage of his resignation prompted by the issue of 42 day detention. In contrast the DUP shamefully supported Brown’s government as the legislation scraped through the Commons, causing many commentators to suppose the party had extracted some manner of bribe in exchange for its votes. The Conservative party looked to be galloping toward an unassailable lead and a possible landslide in the next Parliament, but Labour began to claw back ground and recorded a useful win in the Glenrothes by-election . In