Following the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, the then British Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, and Ambassador Robert Brinkley pressed Pakistan to send ISI MG Ahmed Shuja Pasha to India, a US embassy cable posted by WikiLeaks has revealed. During a conversation with Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, Miliband described Pasha as a welcome “new broom†and [...]
Posts Tagged ‘David Miliband’
‘Brinkley, Miliband pressed Zardari to send ISI chief to India following 26/11’: Cable
December 2nd, 2010 |
No Comments
More than a slapped wrist?
March 23rd, 2010 |
No Comments
Britain expels an Israeli diplomat as a row over the killing of a Hamas official rumbles on
“GIVEN that this was a very sophisticated operation in which high-quality forgeries were made, the Government judges it highly likely that the forgeries were made by a state intelligence service.” So said David Miliband, Britain’s foreign secretary, on Tuesday March 23rd, explaining to Parliament why he had decided to eject an Israeli diplomat—thought to be a member of Mossad, the Israeli external intelligence service—from the country.
The row stems from the assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, a senior member of Hamas killed in a Dubai hotel in January. The killing involved 27 undercover agents travelling on forged passports. Twelve of the team used British documents; others used fake Irish, Australian and French papers. The papers may have been forged, but the identities were real: many belonged to Israeli citizens with dual nationality. In press interviews, all of the genuine passport-holders have denied any knowledge of, or involvement in, the Dubai killing. But their identities were certainly made use of. British policeman have travelled to interview some of them. Their statements may have provided the government with at least some of the “compelling reasons” which Mr Miliband said led him to believe that Israel was responsible for the misuse of British passports. …
Iran releases five Britons detained from yacht: radio
December 2nd, 2009 |
No Comments
Iran has released five Britons who had been detained in the Gulf after their yacht apparently strayed into Iranian waters, state radio said on Wednesday. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband held talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki late on Tuesday and called for formal
Hillary Clinton ‘has the hots’ for British Foreign Minister
November 19th, 2009 |
No Comments
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has confessed that she has a ‘crush’ on Britain’’s foreign minister, David Miliband.
Hillary, who is married to former US president Bill Clinton, gushed over youthful-looking, 44-year-old Miliband in the latest issue of US Vogue magazine.
“Oh my God! If you saw him it would be a big crush,” Herald Sun [...]
Miliband, Lavrov meet in Moscow
November 3rd, 2009 |
No Comments
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his British counterpart David Miliband signed joint statements in Moscow on Monday. RIA Novosti reports that the statements related to nuclear nonproliferation, Afghanistan and the Middle East peace process.
Politics today
August 5th, 2009 |
No Comments
Today’s newspapers say it all about the current political landscape and the interaction of the main parties in conversation with voters.
The Conservative’s rightly win praise for their “primary” experiment in Totness, where all 68,000 eligible constituents were engaged and given a postal vote in the selection of the local Tory candidate (and next MP). [...]
Hillary Clinton Pressured British Government To Not Reveal Details Of Gitmo Detainee’s Treatment
July 30th, 2009 |
No Comments
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, warned David Miliband that America would consider cutting security co-operation with the UK if a British court releases information about a former Guantanamo Bay detainee, two judges have been told.
…
Important to stabilize Pakistan for a peaceful Afghanistan : Miliband
July 29th, 2009 |
No Comments
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has commended efforts of the Obama administration to re-balance the relationship between the United States and Pakistan saying it is very important to stabilize Pakistan in order to maintain peace in Afghanistan.
“We need a more stable Pakistan to get a more stable Afghanistan. That’’s why I really applaud what President [...]
UK and US ready to talk to Taliban
July 28th, 2009 |
No Comments
A concerted effort to start unprecedented talks between Taliban and British and American envoys was outlined yesterday in a significant change in tactics designed to bring about a breakthrough in the attritional, eight-year conflict in Afghanistan.
Senior ministers and commanders on the ground believe they have created the right conditions to open up a dialogue with “second-tier” local leaders now the Taliban have been forced back in a swath of Helmand province.
They are hoping that Britain’s continuing military presence in Helmand, strengthened by the arrival of thousands of US troops, will encourage Taliban commanders to end the insurgency. There is even talk in London and Washington of a military “exit strategy”.
Speaking at the end of the five-week Operation Panther’s Claw in which hundreds of British troops were reported to have cleared insurgents from a vital region of Helmand province, Lieutenant-General Simon Mayall, deputy chief of defence staff, said: “It gives the Taliban ‘second tier’ room to reconnect with the government and this is absolutely at the heart of this operation.”
The second tier of the insurgency are regarded as crucial because they control large numbers of Taliban fighters in Pashtun-dominated southern Afghanistan. The first tier of Taliban commanders – hardliners around Mullah Omar – could not be expected to start talks in the foreseeable future. The third tier – footsoldiers with no strong commitments – are not regarded as influential or significant players.
The change in tactics was revealed as the Ministry of Defence announced that two more British soldiers were killed in southern Afghanistan. One, from the Light Dragoons, was on patrol in Operation Panther’s Claw; the other, a soldier from the Royal Artillery, was killed on foot patrol in Sangin. Ten soldiers have died in Operation Panther’s Claw.
Mayall is responsible for formulating operational policy in Afghanistan and his remarks gave added weight to interventions by senior ministers yesterday.
David Miliband, the foreign secretary, and Douglas Alexander, the international development secretary, yesterday held out the prospect of reconciliation between the Afghan government and Taliban fighters prepared to renounce violence.
For more than a year, British intelligence officers have been instigating contacts with Taliban commanders and their entourage. But their task has been very delicate given the sensitivities of the Karzai administration in Kabul.
The situation has been complicated further by the influx of hardline and ideologically motivated fighters joining the Taliban and other insurgent groups from across the Pakistani border.
But the fact that senior ministers and military commanders seized on the apparent success of Operation Panther’s Claw to highlight the possibility of talks with the Taliban reflects their concern about the lack of progress so far in Nato’s counter-insurgency. Significantly, and as if to counter public aversion to talks with the Taliban, ministers and military commanders alike compared the current campaign in southern Afghanistan to anti-terrorist operations in Northern Ireland.
A ComRes poll in today’s Independent suggests most people now believe British troops should be pulled out of Afghanistan. Most of those who responded (58%) said the Taliban could not be defeated militarily, and 52% of those surveyed said troops should be withdrawn immediately. This compares with a Guardian/ICM poll earlier this month which showed that 42% of those surveyed wanted troops to be withdrawn immediately.
America’s priorities in Afghanistan will be spelled out in a briefing paper drawn up by General Stanley McChrystal, the new US commander in the country, due to be handed to Barack Obama tomorrow.
He will emphasise the need for speeding up the training of Afghan troops, according to defence sources. He is also expected to ask for more troops from Nato allies. British military commanders are drawing up contingency plans to increase the number of British forces to more than 10,000 from the current 9,000.
Asked whether he needed more troops, Brigadier Tim Radford, commander of British troops in Helmand, replied: “I have enough forces to do what I set out to do in Panther’s Claw.”
The number of British troops that might be deployed in future was “out of my hands”, he said. But he added that as the number of Afghan army recruits increased, the number of Nato forces required to train them also increased.
Miliband’s call for talks with more moderate Taliban elements was echoed later by Gordon Brown, who said: “Our strategy has always been to complement the military action that we’ve got to take to clear the Taliban, to threaten al-Qaida in its bases – while at the same time we put in more money to build the Afghan forces, the troops, the police.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
UK urges change in Afghan strategy
July 27th, 2009 |
No Comments
David Miliband has called for a change of emphasis in strategy in Afghanistan, urging the country’s government to talk to moderate members of the Taliban.
In a speech to Nato, the foreign secretary said a political coalition, including current insurgents, must be built to secure Afghanistan’s future.
Those now fighting UK and US troops who were willing to renounce violence should be reintegrated into society.
He also urged other Nato members to contribute more to the military effort.
July has been the deadliest month for the UK and Nato since operations began.
‘Significant gains’
Mr Miliband said the fight against the Taliban in the south of the country had caused a "heavy toll" in British deaths.
However, he said Operation Panther’s Claw had made "significant gains" in taking and securing land ahead of this month’s presidential elections.
Mr Miliband said the objectives of the UK’s mission was clear but that the public "wanted to know whether and how we can succeed" in Afghanistan.
He said a viable political solution, alongside the military offensive, was essential to securing Afghanistan’s future.
As part of this, Mr Miliband said current insurgents should be re-integrated into society and, in some cases, given a role in local and central government.
He said there was "an uncompromising core" within the Taliban which must be fought and defeated.
But he said others who had been coerced or bribed into joining the insurgency could be won round if they disowned violence and respected the Afghan constitution.
"These Afghans must have the option to choose a different course," he said.
Earlier, International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander compared the move to the talks which brought an end to the conflict in Northern Ireland.
Mr Alexander, who is in Afghanistan, conceded that it was a "challenging" message for politicians to suggest when British troops were being killed in action.
‘Renunciate violence’
He told BBC Radio 4′s Today programme he had "confidence in the good judgment of the British people".
Mr Alexander added: "I think people recognise from the experience of places like Northern Ireland that it is necessary to put military pressure on the Taliban while at the same time holding out the prospect that there can be a political process that can follow, whereby those that are willing to renunciate violence can follow a different path."
Mr Alexander acknowledged there were members of the Taliban who were "irreconcilable".
However, he said there were others who had chosen violence out of "desperation" and, if they could be persuaded to take a new path, they should be included in moves towards a "broader political process".
Mr Alexander said there was a broad international consensus for the process, which he said would have to be led by the Afghan government.
On Sunday, the UK government pledged £225m in aid to the Afghan government, to try to undermine the heroin trade.
Announcing the package in Kabul, Mr Alexander said the UK was committed to securing a "stable and democratic future for the people of Afghanistan".
He added that the military operation against the insurgency was "only part of the solution".
Wave of attacks
Mr Alexander is now visiting Helmand province, where UK soldiers have been engaged in Operation Panther’s Claw to capture and hold land previously in Taliban hands.
The operation has led to the deaths of 20 British soldiers in the past four weeks.
US troops have also seen a rise in casualties, while parts of Afghanistan that have been mostly peaceful have seen an upsurge in violence.
Other Nato forces such as German troops – mainly engaged in training and reconstruction – have been drawn into offensive action.
A wave of Taliban attacks over the weekend left 22 dead, including insurgents, a foreign soldier and two Afghan soldiers, authorities said.
The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a Nato soldier "died of wounds suffered in a hostile incident" on Saturday, but did not confirm his nationality.
Meanwhile a roadside bomb in the Herat province wounded four Italian soldiers.
There are about 90,000 foreign soldiers currently deployed in Afghanistan.
Large numbers are being moved to the troubled south of the country ahead of the elections on 20 August.
So far in July, 67 international troops have been killed, bringing the total number of coalition deaths in 2009 to 223.</p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Brown declares first phase of Afghan offensive over
July 27th, 2009 |
No Comments
• Gordon Brown hails success of Operation Panther’s Claw
• David Miliband calls for renewed peace talks
• Soldier killed in explosion named as Bombardier Craig Hopson
Gordon Brown announced today that the first phase of an operation to drive back the Taliban in Helmand province is over.
The announcement came as the foreign secretary, David Miliband, called for “a more coherent effort” to achieve a political solution in Afghanistan by talking to the militants and offering them better alternatives to fighting.
During a constituency visit in Fife, the prime minister said it had been “one of the most difficult summers” since troops went into Afghanistan in 2001, with 20 British service personnel killed in July alone.
He added: “Now that Operation Panther’s Claw has shown that it can bring success and the first phase of that operation is over, it’s time to commemorate all those soldiers who have given their lives and to thank all our British forces for the determination and professionalism and courage that they’ve shown.
“What we’ve done is push back the Taliban ‑ and what we’ve done also is to start to break that chain of terror that links the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the streets of Britain.”
Brown echoed Miliband’s call for talks with more moderate Taliban elements: “Our strategy has always been to complement the military action that we’ve got to take to clear the Taliban, to threaten al-Qaida in its bases, while at the same time we put in more money to build the Afghan forces, the troops, the police.”
Speaking at Nato headquarters in Brussels earlier, the foreign secretary said the insurgency was a loose coalition of the Taliban, tribal groups and warlords with different agendas, and under intensified military pressure on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border.
He argued that the Afghan government, with outside help, could do more to widen those divisions by reconciling non-ideological elements.
The news came as the latest soldier to be killed in Afghanistan was named today as Bombardier Craig Hopson, who was serving with the 40th Regiment Royal Artillery.
The 24-year-old, from Castleford, West Yorkshire, was killed on Saturday when the Jackal vehicle in which he was travelling was struck by a roadside bomb, the Ministry of Defence said.
He was the 189th British soldier to have died in the country since the start of operations in 2001.
It also emerged today that Afghan authorities have reached a ceasefire with local Taliban fighters in Badhis province, near the north-western border with Turkmenistan.
The government in Kabul said it was prepared to strike more local truces ahead of presidential elections on 20 August.
British officials argue that such deals will only last if they are underpinned by a reconciliation process that offers protection and long-term alternative livelihoods for insurgent fighters.
They said Miliband had chosen to deliver the speech today in part because Britain and Nato were suffering their highest casualties since 2001 and the British public needed to hear a clear strategy. But, they added, it was also a message to the Afghan government that it needed to do more to achieve a political solution.
Miliband said the renewed military efforts against insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan could not end the war on their own. “We need to help the Afghan government exploit the opportunity, with a more coherent effort to fragment the various elements of the insurgency, and turn those who can be reconciled to live within the Afghan constitution,” he said, in an early text of his speech.
The Afghan government has a reconciliation process that allows insurgents to return to civilian life, but one British official said “it needs to be supercharged and made a priority”.
“The basis for both reintegration and reconciliation is a starker choice: bigger incentives to switch sides and stay out of trouble, alongside tougher action against those who refuse,” Miliband said. “The Afghan government needs effective grass-roots initiatives to offer an alternative to fight or flight for the foot soldiers of the insurgency. Essentially this means a clear route for former insurgents to return to their villages and go back to farming the land, or a role for some of them within the legitimate Afghan security forces.”
Miliband said that for the strategy to work, the new Afghan government elected in August would have to take greater responsibility for providing services and development in villages.
“We talk often about burden-sharing between members of our alliance. But the biggest shift must now be towards the Afghan state taking more responsibility. Because it is only if the political will is there that a meaningful package of incentives and sanctions can be developed to support reconciliation and reintegration,” he said.
President Hamid Karzai is widely tipped to be re-elected in August, but after that he will come under more intense pressure from Britain and other Nato countries with troops in Afghanistan to ensure his government is more efficient and less corrupt.
The key to this, Miliband said, would be the choice of the 34 provincial governors and the 364 district governors, who would have to provide “local governance that is credible, competent and clean, properly resourced and supported from Kabul, and works with the grain of tribal structures and history. It is not possible to overstate the importance of these appointments,” he said.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Britain pushes for Afghan peace talks with Taliban
July 27th, 2009 |
No Comments
David Miliband increases pressure for negotiations as Afghanistan agrees provincial ceasefire with militants
The British government today stepped up pressure for talks with more moderate elements of the Taliban as Afghanistan announced its first provincial ceasefire agreement with the militants.
The foreign secretary, David Miliband, said the insurgency was “divided”, with many of those fighting against international forces doing so for “pragmatic” rather than ideological reasons.
Speaking at Nato’s headquarters in Brussels, he said the Afghan authorities should offer incentives to persuade insurgents to switch allegiances.
He also called for Britain’s Nato allies to take on a greater share of the military burden in Afghanistan.
Miliband said the insurgents were being squeezed by military operations either side of the Durand line separating Afghanistan from Pakistan.
“From this position, we need to help the Afghan government exploit the opportunity, with a more coherent effort to fragment the various elements of the insurgency, and turn those who can be reconciled to live within the Afghan constitution.
“The basis for both reintegration and reconciliation is a starker choice: bigger incentives to switch sides and stay out of trouble, alongside tougher action against those who refuse.
“The Afghan government needs effective grass-roots initiatives to offer an alternative to fight or flight for the foot soldiers of the insurgency.
“Essentially this means a clear route for former insurgents to return to their villages and go back to farming the land, or a role for some of them within the legitimate Afghan security forces.”
The ceasefire between authorities and Taliban in the remote north-western Badhis province was agreed on Saturday, near the border with Turkmenistan, the presidential spokesman Seyamak Herawi told Reuters.
He said Afghanistan wanted to make similar deals with the Taliban in other parts of the country ahead of the presidential elections on 20 August.
“As long as the ceasefire holds, the government does not have the intention to attack the Taliban [in Badghis]. And the Taliban can also take part in the elections,” Herawi said.
The Foreign Office minister Bill Rammell told the Commons last year that the UK would support Afghan efforts to reach out to Taliban elements who were “genuinely prepared” to leave the insurgency and engage in the political process.
The US government has increased pressure on Kabul to begin such a process.
July has been the deadliest month for the UK and Nato since operations began in 2001. The Ministry of Defence is expected to name the soldier who died during a vehicle patrol in the Lashkar Gah district of central Helmand province on Saturday morning.
He was from the 40th Regiment Royal Artillery, and the 20th British serviceman to die in Afghanistan this month.
Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, a spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said: “He was one soldier, who was here for one cause, to help the Afghan people.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
UK minister speaks on Afghan mission
July 27th, 2009 |
No Comments
The foreign secretary is expected to focus on how the international coalition can win its mission in Afghanistan in a speech to Nato.
David Miliband is believed to be keen to outline the need to support the Afghan government, alongside the continuing military mission.
July has been the deadliest month for the UK and Nato since operations began.
The UK on Sunday pledged £225m in aid to the Afghan government, to try to undermine the heroin trade.
Announcing the package in Kabul, International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander said the UK was committed to securing a "stable and democratic future for the people of Afghanistan".
He added that the military operation against the insurgency was "only part of the solution".
Mr Alexander is due to arrive in Helmand province on Monday, where UK soldiers have been engaged in Operation Panther’s Claw to capture and hold land previously in Taliban hands.
The operation has led to the deaths of 20 British soldiers in the past four weeks.
US troops have also seen a rise in casualties, while parts of Afghanistan that have been mostly peaceful have seen an upsurge in violence.
Wave of attacks
Other Nato forces such as German troops – mainly engaged in training and reconstruction – have been drawn into offensive action.
A wave of Taliban attacks over the weekend left 22 dead, including insurgents, a foreign soldier and two Afghan soldiers, authorities said.
The Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a Nato soldier "died of wounds suffered in a hostile incident" on Saturday, but did not confirm his nationality.
Meanwhile a roadside bomb in the Herat province wounded four Italian soldiers.
There are about 90,000 foreign soldiers currently deployed in Afghanistan.
Large numbers are being moved to the troubled south of the country ahead of the elections on 20 August.
So far in July, 67 international troops have been killed, bringing the total number of coalition deaths in 2009 to 223. </p
This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.
Miliband looks beyond war in Afghanistan
July 26th, 2009 |
No Comments
With British soldiers being killed at the highest rate since the war against the Taliban started eight years ago, David Miliband, the foreign secretary, will say tomorrow that more effort must be made to promote the political and economic development of Afghanistan.
In a speech at Nato headquarters in Brussels, Miliband will stress the need for a comprehensive strategy beyond the fighting by mainly US and British soldiers in southern Afghanistan.
His intervention comes at a time of concern within the government at the impact on public opinion of the rising number of British deaths. Ministers and defence chiefs have warned there will be more casualties as British and US troops mount offensive operations in an attempt to provide more security for the Afghan presidential elections next month.
The incumbent, Hamid Karzai, is expected to win, though privately both US and British officials are concerned about his dependence on corrupt warlords who pay scant regard to basic human rights.
Miliband is expected to emphasise the need for development aid to be channelled to economic and welfare programmes to help ordinary Afghans. Military action must be complemented by measures to improve the way Afghans are governed, Miliband is expected to say.
The coming months are regarded as crucial if Nato-led forces are to force the Taliban to retreat and lead to a reconciliation process involving at least some of their leaders to negotiate an inclusive agreement involving Pashtuns and with the blessing of Pakistan.
Whitehall officials said tonight that Miliband would go easy on European allies, most of whom have refused to allow their soldiers to be deployed for combat.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Cameron condemns Labour tactics
July 24th, 2009 |
No Comments
• Conservative victor has 7,000-plus majority
• Tory leader says Brown ‘should learn lesson’
David Cameron accused Gordon Brown of running an “utterly despicable” campaign in Norwich North today as he celebrated a byelection victory that saw the Conservatives winning what was a safe Labour seat with a majority of more than 7,000. The Tory leader claimed that Labour had told “untruth after untruth” about opposition spending plans in the contest, which was triggered by the resignation of Ian Gibson after he was banned by his party from standing at the general election because of the way he used parliamentary expenses.
Chloe Smith, who at 27 becomes the youngest MP in Britain, took the seat with a swing from Labour to the Tories of 16.5%. Gibson had a majority of more than 5,000 at the last election and Norwich North has been Labour for 45 of the last 60 years.
Smith took nearly 40% of the vote, although when the result was declared at lunchtime on Friday it was clear that she had picked up fewer votes than the Conservative candidate did in 2005. Labour’s Chris Ostrowski, who was struck down with swine flu in the final 72 hours of the campaign – his wife Katie delivered his speech at the count – got just 18% of the vote, although he managed to see off a challenge from the Liberal Democrats. They had hoped for second place but got 14% of the vote and third place.
The campaign started after the Conservatives declared that they might have to cut public spending in most government departments by 10% after the general election, and Labour attacked Smith aggressively on this issue. One Labour leaflet suggested that the Tories could close up to 10% of schools in the country, and another said the Tories were “threatening to do away with free TV licences and bus passes for the elderly”.
This Cameron, on a celebration visit to Norwich, condemned Labour’s tactics in the strongest terms.
“I have seen a Labour campaign in this byelection that I would describe – and I choose my words carefully – as utterly despicable. If you look at what they said about us it was untruth after untruth,” he said. “Labour should learn a lesson … in this campaign where less than one in five people in a Labour-held constituency came out to vote for the Labour party, that this country has had enough of Gordon Brown’s dividing lines, has had enough of Gordon Brown’s misleading claims about his opponents, has had enough of Gordon Brown’s claims about Tory cuts and Labour investment and all the rest of that rubbish.”
Tory strategists believe that Brown was using the byelection to road-test a “Tory cuts” campaign and that the result shows that this approach does not work.
The byelection was also the first to be held since the controversy about MPs’ expenses erupted. The Tories believe their victory proves that main-party candidates such as Smith, who made transparency a key feature of her campaign, can still see off the threat from independents and minor parties in an era of public scepticism about politicians.
Brown said the result was “disappointing” for Labour but that local factors were to blame. “The voters were clearly torn between their anger and dismay at what has been happening over MPs’ expenses, something that we are trying to clean up, and at the same time the support for the former MP, the Labour MP Ian Gibson who was very popular,” he said. Brown also pointed out that all the main parties attracted fewer votes than they did in the seat in 2005.
The defeat seems unlikely to reopen the debate about Labour’s leadership, at least in public and in the short-term. David Miliband, the foreign secretary, said today: “Everybody understands that the byelection reflects some unique circumstances. It is not evidence for the need of a change in the Labour leadership.”
The Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, said Brown’s “ham-fisted treatment of a popular MP” had resulted in “disaster for Labour”.
According to a Press Association analysis, Cameron would be swept into 10 Downing Street with a Commons majority of 218 if the result was repeated across the country at the next general election.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Lord Mandelson attends 80% of committees
July 21st, 2009 |
No Comments
Peter Mandelson’s influence in government was underscored today with the release of a breakdown of government committees which shows that he attended 80% of them.
Mandelson, the first secretary of state, attends 35 of the 43 committees and subcommittees, in contrast to the 23 attended by foreign secretary David Miliband.
Mandelson’s total is also in contrast to the 27 attended by chancellor Alistair Darling and sees the business secretary asked to cast an eye over policies as varied as immigration, climate change, “life chances”; Africa; food and energy and children.
The official deputy prime minister to Tony Blair, John Prescott, sat on just 17 committees.
Mandelson’s reach was revealed during a rush of announcements as parliament rose for its summer recess. This summer recess is longer than last year’s at 82 days.
In contrast to previous years when the prime minister has only managed a few days’ break, Downing Street said Gordon Brown would be going on a longer holiday than usual, taking all of August off.
Under a deadline effectively imposed by the recess, MPs passed emergency legislation tonight which would see the emergency creation of a new watchdog to regulate their expenses.
In legislation rushed through within a month, MPs finally voted to create the new body, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, after the government was forced to make a number of concessions during its passage through parliament, including suffering one defeat when MPs rejected attempts by the government to end the historic right of parliamentary privilege.
Speaking about the attempt to get the measures through parliament, the minister responsible for the legislation, justice secretary Jack Straw, described it as “the most difficult piece of legislation” he has ever dealt with.
Though the expenses legislation began life enjoying cross-party consensus, Tory and Lib Dem support crumbled when the opposition parties believed the government was trying to shoehorn into the legislation additional measures they thought were superfluous to the clean-up of MPs’ expenses. MPs expressed dismay today about the lack of time to scrutinise the legislation, with the Tory grandee Sir Patrick Cormack complaining that MPs only had an hour to vote on a bill he argued had been “completely rewritten”.
MPs were debating the parliamentary standards bill after it had returned to the commons chamber from the Lords where they had removed from the legislation parts that would have made it an offence should a parliamentarian fail to comply with the register of financial interests that will be maintained by IPSA.
Though the government had tried to create three criminal offences, the final legislation sees only one. It is now a criminal offence for an MP to make a false expense claim with that MP punished by up to 12 months if found guilty.
In an attempt to allay backbench fears of rushed legislation, ministers said there would be the opportunity in the next two years through a “sunset clause” to review the IPSA in formal post-legislative scrutiny.
Another body, the members estimate committee, also announced it would be placing more stringent demands on MPs, requiring them to publish a greater amount of detail on the amount they claimed in second home allowances over the last year.
Commons authorities are expected to publish their details of MPs’ expense claims in the autumn. Though the home addresses will be blacked out, the MEC now wants MPs to state directly whether they have switched the address they have designated as their second homes.
The latest, more onerous move, has been spearheaded by the new speaker, John Bercow, who chairs the members estimate committee.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Spanish minister on rocks over Gibraltar visit
July 21st, 2009 |
No Comments
It was some time back in 1704 when a Spanish minister last set foot on Gibraltar after Spain ceded the territory to Britain under the Treaty of Utrecht. After much diplomatic wrangling Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos is due to hold talks with his British counterpart David Miliband and Gibralter’s Chief Minister Peter Caruana on the rock itself.
Spanish minister ends 300-year Gibraltar snub
July 21st, 2009 |
No Comments
Residents of rocky colony fly the flag to demonstrate their allegiance to Britain
The first Spanish minister to visit Gibraltar for 300 years crossed the border this afternoon, skipping the normal traffic jams and being greeted by union flags hanging from windows and balconies.
Foreign minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, is making his historic visit to the Rock under the terms of a three-way agreement with Britain, Gibraltar and Spain that has done much to ease centuries of mutual antagonism over the tiny colony.
He is meeting Britain’s foreign secretary, David Miliband, and Gibraltar’s chief minister, Peter Caruana, to sign agreements covering everything from police co-operation to the environment.
Uniformed Gibraltarian bobbies greeted Moratinos’ car as it skipped the queues that normally form at the border and drove straight on to the Rock.
Gibraltarians dusted off their union flags and hung them out to remind Moratinos where their loyalties lie.
Although recent agreements signed under the three-way pact have helped sort out many historic gripes, Spain still claims sovereignty over the two-and-a quarter square miles of rocky outcrop.
That sovereignty was signed away in the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 but Spain claims that, under United Nations decolonisation rules, Gibraltar should have been handed back long ago.
Moratinos and his hosts were due to ride the cable car to offices high up the 1,300ft rock that dominates Gibraltar, where they were to hold their meeting.
A recent spat over the maritime frontiers between Gibraltar and Spain had put today’s meeting in danger.
Caruana recently called on Gibraltar boats to fire off distress flares to call for help if they were stopped by Spain’s civil guard patrol boats while approaching the Rock’s harbour.
Spain’s opposition conservative People’s Party (PP) has called Moratinos a “traitor” and claims the visit is an “insult to the dignity of Spain”.
“This is one more backward step towards renouncing the battle for Spanish sovereignty,” said the PP’s secretary general in the southern region of AndalucÃa, Antonio Sanz.
The opposition Gibraltar Socialist Labour Party condemned the visit, saying it should not have been allowed while Spain was claiming sovereignty over disputed waters. “The fact that Mr Moratinos is coming is, for us at least, an opportunity to show him just how British Gibraltar is and will stay,” said party spokesman Fabian Picardo. “We certainly won’t have our noses rubbed into Spain’s latest affront to the sovereignty of our waters.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
James Purnell: I lost faith in Brown months ago
July 17th, 2009 |
No Comments
Ex-minister attacks ‘conservatism’ of Labour and calls for electoral reform
James Purnell, the former cabinet minister whose resignation almost toppled the prime minister, admits today he had been thinking about quitting the government for months after losing faith in Gordon Brown’s ability to win the next election.
In his first interview since leaving the cabinet, the former work and pensions secretary said he had been considering resigning since December.
He said: “Over the last six months I had been thinking, ‘has the elastic stretched beyond the point where I feel I am being true to myself?’”
Purnell, who says he is unlikely to return to frontline politics, was the most senior of the 11 who walked out of Brown’s government last month and the only cabinet minister to directly call on the prime minister to stand down.
He surprised Downing Street by quitting on polling day of June’s local and European elections, 10 minutes before voting closed.
In his resignation letter – which he reveals he wrote on the day in five minutes in his Stalybridge and Hyde constituency office during a break from canvassing, Purnell told the prime minister: “I now believe your continued leadership makes a Conservative victory more, not less likely.”
In the interview, Purnell highlights his concerns about Labour policy and the problem of “small c conservatism” from the government over the last 12 years.
He tells today’s Guardian that:
• The government has failed to properly make the positive case for immigration and is “allergic” to a debate on the wisdom of faith schools.
• Labour should hold a referendum on electoral reform at the next election.
• He did not expect fellow cabinet members to follow his lead and resign.
• His decision to quit put his close friend the foreign secretary, David Miliband, in a “difficult position”. He calls Miliband “one of the most serious politicians of his generation”.
The resignation of the former Downing Street adviser, who was pivotal in the creation of New Labour, gave the impression the move to oust Brown was a “Blairite coup”, but in his interview Purnell urges the party to move beyond New Labour, while admitting he is “nostalgic” for the period.
He said: “All those Blairite, New Labour labels … for me, it’s a bit like Britpop – I feel nostalgic for it, it was absolutely right for its time but that time was 1994. It’s a very different feeling being 12 years into government from the idealism of the start, but we need to recapture that idealism, not by living in the past or by aping New Labour or just sticking to the old tunes. We need to open up New Labour, reinvent it and then eventually move beyond it.”
Purnell will assume a new role at the thinktank Demos in September, returning to the thinktank roots of his 20s. He will lead a three-year project to reinvigorate leftwing politics, which will see contributions from influential, more traditional leftwing backbenchers Jon Cruddas and soon-to-retire Alan Simpson. Though he says he hopes to remain in constituency politics Purnell indicates he will never return to a frontbench team.
He said: “The way I am feeling at the moment it is pretty unlikely I’ll want to go back into frontline politics. I never want to leave politics – I love politics. I love ideas and I was pretty excited by the Department for Work and Pensions but actually I get exactly the same kick, in some ways in a freer way, from the stuff I am doing at Demos.”
Purnell showers praise on Miliband and confirms the pair who have met twice since Purnell’s resignation – shared doubts about the prime minister’s ability to lead the Labour party into a fourth Labour victory.
In the interview, Purnell also defends the timing of informing the prime minister of his decision to resign. He said he wanted to ensure news of his departure did not emerge before the local and European polls closed, further demoralising Labour activists aghast at the decision a day earlier of the communities secretary Hazel Blears to resign.
On schools, he said: “I personally wouldn’t have a problem having not-for- profit companies [but] on the other hand we’ve been allergic about having any kind of debate about the fact we’re making lots of parents have to pretend to be religious at school … it’s a completely terrible position to put people in.”
The government has also too often found itself “tongue-tied” on immigration in failing to tackle rightwing rhetoric. “We need to say, ‘immigration is good for the country’.
“The answer is to not end up looking tongue-tied doing some things you don’t actually believe, but working out what the argument is which might be able to win people round to your point of view which is, ‘will we be a more successful country if we open up in terms of free trade, in terms of Labour markets. We’re going to be a more interesting country’.”
Purnell also says that, in retrospect, the party should have changed the electoral system to back the Jenkins commission in 1998 and backs the suggestion of cabinet members Alan Johnson and John Denham that the question be put to a referendum at the next election.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Memo to Clinton: US ain’t top dog
The US doesn’t necessarily lead the pack in world affairs – something Hillary Clinton should remember on her Asian tour
Speaking in Washington before embarking on this week’s Asian tour, Hillary Clinton set out the most definitive version yet of how the Obama administration intends to deal with the world. The US secretary of state spoke of “a new era of engagement based on common interests, shared values, and mutual respect” and of a foreign policy “blending principle and pragmatism”.
Contrasting this collaborative approach with the “for us or against us” stance of the Bush administration, Clinton said the US would opt for diplomacy first when dealing with Iran, North Korea and other nations or adversaries. There were no guarantees of success; and dialogue did not imply acceptance of repressive regimes. But “we cannot be afraid or unwilling to engage … as long as engagement might advance our interests”.
Clinton’s call for a “multi-partner” rather than a multi-polar world is the diplomatic equivalent of police brutality victim Rodney King’s famous (and unsuccessful) plea for mutual tolerance at the height of the 1992 Los Angeles race riots. “People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along?” asked King. Clinton’s similar, less eloquent call for international amity and understanding may also have limited impact. Today North Korea’s hothead leadership lambasted her, saying she resembled “a pensioner going shopping“. So no breakthrough just yet.
More surprisingly perhaps, Clinton’s visits this week to India and Thailand, where she met leaders of south-east Asian nations and her Chinese, Russian, South Korean and Japanese counterparts, suggested to some that the US may struggle to maintain constructive partnerships with its allies, let alone its enemies. These tensions are only partly attributable to George Bush’s toxic legacy and resulting anti-Americanism. They have more to do with perceived changes in the global balance of power, principally a post-crash decline in US clout and a parallel expansion of Chinese and Indian influence.
In Delhi, Clinton was publicly slapped down over pre-Copenhagen pressure from Washington and others for binding caps on carbon emissions, with environment minister Jairam Ramesh complaining about mooted carbon tariffs on Indian exports. At the same time, she acquiesced in Bush’s nuclear technology deal with India, which drove a coach and horses through the international non-proliferation regime, and gave a green light to massive future US arms sales to India, hardly reassuring prospects for Pakistan.
Clinton also appears to have tip-toed around the issue of divided Kashmir, mindful perhaps of British foreign secretary David Miliband’s bruising experience in Delhi earlier this year. This is odd, given the high importance Washington attaches to its Afghanistan-Pakistan strategy and its wish that Pakistani troops, currently deployed along the Line of Control facing India, be redirected into the battle against the Taliban and Islamist militants. These and other strains are certain to resurface once the jolly bonhomie surrounding Clinton’s visit, more resembling a campaign trail meet-and-greet than a diplomatic summit, dissipates.
“Obama is committed to ratifying the comprehensive test ban treaty and strengthening the non-proliferation treaty [India is party to neither] … He also intends for the US to be part of the international effort to replace the Kyoto protocol with a treaty-based climate control regime including India, China and other emerging powers,” noted Strobe Talbott of the Brookings Institution thinktank in a recent article. Such fundamental differences do not bode well for the strengthened, strategic partnership with India that Clinton enthused about.
Clinton’s declaration in Thailand that the US was “back” in south-east Asia, and intended to give greater priority to its friends in the region, also elicited mixed responses. Her ever tougher line on North Korea, coupled with US pressure on Asean members to do more to confront the Burmese junta, makes many countries nervous.
This cage-rattling could yet prove counter-productive. Old ally Japan, for example, may be about to elect a party pledged to re-examine the role of the US military in the Asia-Pacific region. Others, such as Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore, are increasingly drawn towards Beijing’s powerful economic orbit. For its part, China itself may no longer be a US enemy – but it remains unclear whether, on a range of international issues, it can really be classed as a friend. Mostly China suits itself. These days it can afford to.
Yet possibly the biggest obstacle to the “new mindset” partnerships Clinton envisaged in her Washington speech is of her own creation – her very old-fashioned assumption that, in all such arrangements, the US will naturally be top dog and pack leader. This is what Iranian conservatives term the “global arrogance”. Memo to HC: it ain’t necessarily so.