Ever since the formation of a political union in Europe, the Continent has battled between liberalism and socialism (or left vs right) – the argument was mainly based around economic reform. This problem still persists today, with France resisting the free market approach and Germany unwilling to restrict trade union power.

France and Germany, at first, rejected any Anglophile influence within the European Union and rejected the economic liberal stance of Britain. It is difficult to understand or justify the positions Europe once took, especially over the Chinese arms embargo, which the EU wanted to end. But Europe is now starting to adopt liberalisation of markets, and is building an ethical foreign policy, stronger military partnership, and abandoning plans to maintain the Chinese arms embargo.

This experiment is now 27 members strong, and recently expanded to create a Mediterranean Union within the current system. However, the Mediterranean states do have access to the European market, and vice versa, because a minority of the Mediterranean members wanted to join the European Union but were denied access on the grounds of not being “European”. So the EU created a union within a union.

It is difficult to predict if the Mediterranean Union will work; Turkey, after all, still wants to join the EU. The misfit and unorthodox transition has put Europe in an uncomfortable position within the world and the new Union is located in uncharted waters; the Middle East process has been inadvertently placed into the hands of a nervous, yet powerful cabal. Read more »

Those former left-wing pioneers who founded the neoconservative movement in Washington should not be treated like war criminals or fathers of the ‘new imperialism’. In fact the doctrine should be welcomed and supported by us liberals.

We liberals believe in a society based on liberty, justice and a constitutional government, whether it is in are own country or abroad. But we have struggled since Iraq to maintain the common principles following the Liberal Democrats’ vote against the war. And to hear Nick Clegg at the last conference shun “neo-con wars” was almost unbearable to listen to. Why criticise foreign intervention or the ‘Blair doctrine’ because it is immoral, and then sit along side the new left who support groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah? I fail to understand modern Liberals.

Saddam was a fascist dictator who tortured his own citizens and gave financial support to terrorist organisations that declared war against Israel. Removing him from power benefited the West and the Middle East, even though the planning of the war was a disaster for Iraq and the coalition (but that is a different matter.) Now we are faced with Iran, a theocracy ruled by an undemocratic council and with a poor human rights record towards women, homosexuals and reformists. Will we liberals stand by and allow President Mahmud Ahmadinejad to mock and violate international law once more?

Zimbabwe is another nation, too, which is suffering from the exploitations of a tyrant and requires foreign intervention. South Africa and the African Union have allowed Mugabe to go unchallenged for far too long. Britain would be justified in using military force to remove Mugabe and the people of Zimbabwe would welcome UK action - the Catholic Church of Zimbabwe said Britain would be morally justified - but there is no chance of this because liberals have ruled out the idea of humanitarian intervention. Iraq has allowed the very idea to be seen as imperialistic in nature.

Whether it will be Iran, Zimbabwe, Burma or Sudan, we liberals will continue to play the Iraq card in relation to foreign intervention. The Liberal Democrats have placed themselves in the isolationist field of foreign affairs, which is both tragic and depressing.

That is why I am an independent liberal. My views and beliefs are different to some, and my support for the neoconservative agenda has isolated me amongst liberals. But if the liberalism we hold so dear is based on liberty and democracy, then we of all people have the moral right to spread it.

* Daniel Furr is an independent liberal, not linked to the Lib Dems, currently studying business at Greenwich University. He is also a part time freelance blogger commenting on politics and international affairs.

Editor’s note: ‘The Independent View’ is an occaional slot for non-Lib Dem members to put across their viewpoint. If you’re an LDV-reading non-party member - or if you know someone you think would be a good contributor - and would like to write an article, please do get in touch with the editor at .