Following Dominic Raab’s appearance on the Andrew Marr show yesterday morning, Liberal Democrat Acting Leader Ed Davey said:
Dominic Raab’s lapdog defence of Donald Trump’s reckless action against Iran is seriously misguided and not in Britain’s best interests.
The United States’ so-called strategy with Iran and across the Middle East is so incoherent and inconsistent that it is making the search for peace and security far more problematic. So it is a huge mistake for the Foreign Secretary to give Trump a blank cheque of unequivocal support, especially when the Government was not even consulted before this action and this could backfire badly against Britain.
Iran is a dangerous regime but the Middle East has never really recovered from the illegal and disastrously judged Iraq War, when the Conservatives also unwisely backed US military intervention.
Britain should be telling Washington it needs to totally change its policy of maximum pressure and urgently re-focus on the previously successful strategy of engagement led by President Obama.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The "Just War" tradition
Our kids need a lorra, lorra, larffs!!
West End Ward Tuesday Surgeries #dundeewestend
The Joy of Six 1275
Find Halloween and seasonal gifts in my Etsy shop today.
Mick Taylor
Pamela Manning
Simon R
Nonconformistradical
22 Comments
I agree with Ed Davey’s comments.
The USA under President Trump does not really have a strategy beyond “If Obama was for something, it must be wrong and we must do the opposite.”
Call me naive if you wish; but I didn’t view Raaaaab’s performance on the Marr Show with quite the same degree on condemnation. While not actually distancing himself or his boss, for that matter, from what Trump did, he at least showed, in my opinion, a bit of diplomatic non commitment. Let’s wait and see what happens later, when the dust has settled (if it ever does).
What happens from now on is anyone’s guess. My money is on something happening anywhere but on the continent of North America. Any money on London, Paris or Berlin?
I’m not sure Raab was quite a lap dog, and the joint statement since then from UK, France and Germany suggests that Europe might be able to provide a balancing point between the US and Iran.
You can call me naive but I haven’t read much about impeachment in recent days?
Too true, Barry. I wonder why? You know, I reckon that Trump has been watching too many Westerns. This taking out of opponents, for some reason, reminds me of a shoot out between the bad guys and the sheriff. And then, it also reminds me, goodness knows why, of that final scene in Kubrick’s ‘Dr Strangelove’, where the bomber pilot, played by ex rodeo star, Slim Pickens, complete with Stetson, rides that nuclear bomb down to earth like he used to ride a bucking bronco, to the strains, I seem to recall; but I could be wrong, of Vera Lynn singing “We’ll meet again”, as the world descends into a nuclear holocaust.
Perhaps, I’m exaggerating; but, if it’s a soft touch like Iran today, it could be China tomorrow. Yes, with the current US Commander in Chief, it could be that serious.
John your analogy of the Iran situation and comparing the Dr Strangelove film with Trumps action was very amusing, it is good to laugh in these tough times.
Barry Lofty
“You can call me naive but I haven’t read much about impeachment in recent days?”
Keeping impeachment out of the news may benefit the Democrats more than Trump. After months of saying how urgent it was they now appear very hesitant about going forward. Trump supporters will have already disregarded it and neutrals may be wondering what all the “urgency” and “fuss” was about. The killing of Soleimani will have done no harm to Trumps hopes of re-election and most of the leading Democrats have been pitiful in their response to the killing. The UK government have (in my opinion) got the tone spot on.
Remember Trump is in trouble at home. What is a good idea,to Trump, is distract attention from his troubles using an event of over 30 years ago to harness support, win the next election. Would not put anything past him. We will now see how Johnson’s leadership deals with the situation.
This John?
Latest opinion polls suggest Trump would beat all Democrat candidates except Biden, and that is close. Is he in trouble?.
@ Nigel Hunter
Of considerable interest to Lib Dems is how our leadership deals with the situation. I am not over impressed with Ed’s press release. Is there a Charles among our 11 MPs, if so now is the time to speak out.
|The UK has a potentially important role to play in de-escalating tensions between the US and Iran.
The Trump administration has yet to brief congress on the intelligence that led to the security assessment that Solemaini was engaged in an imminent plot to attack America and its allies in the middle east.
The twitter threats emanating from President Trump around bombing of cultural sites in Iran is clearly a breach of the UN convention and could well constitute a war crime were such threats followed through.
It is not a time for threats, insults and undiplomatic language. There are British and American servicemen and civilian personnel at risk Iraq. Cool heads are required to find a path through to where the conflicting interests of the US/Israel/Saudi Arabia on the one hand and iran and its Shia Muslim allies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yeman on the other can find a way of living with each other without resorting to military conflict.
A good place to start would be a serious effort tom bring n end to the war in Yemen that is causing so much humanitarian suffering.
Raab is in an impossible position. Because of Brexit and the desperate need for a trade deal, he has to show he supports Trump. But Trump with his reckless policy has put American lives in danger and is risking a war. If we are perceived to be on the side of the US, then British lives will also be in danger. A war in Iran would be even worse than Iraq both in terms of outcome and for the Tories in terms of public opinion.
As with all conflicts it is the ordinary people wanting just to get on with their lives who suffer in these war torn countries, whoever we perceive to be at fault in these situations far too little thought is given to them. I personally will not be losing sleep about how the British public view the Conservative party.
@Manfarang
You betcha!
It might be wise to keep as flexible position as possible so we can respond to unfolding events while condemning military action except in our defence.
IMO there is something even more ‘strange’ than ‘Dr. Strangelove’ behind all this…
Both Mikes ( Pence and Pompeo) are firm believers in ‘The Rapture’ and, for it to occur, there needs to be a great war in the ME..Believers have already talked about the ‘signs’ proving that the Rapture is coming (Jerusalem becoming Israel’s capital, the rise of ISIS and the Saudi/Yemen conflict to name but three)…
It seems that Pence has already concocted a story involving Iran/Soleimani in the 9/11 attack and those against the World Trade Center and Pentagon in 2001.
If Trump, advised by these two ‘nutters’, does attack sacred/cultural sites in Iraq then the ME will go up in flames..
BTW..those thinking that I’m ’round the twist’ might check on Pence/Pompeo’s worldwide lectures on the coming of the rapture..
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Like the ‘countries’ in Africa, most Middle Eastern states are artificial constructs that emerged, in the case of the latter, from the debris of the Ottoman Empire and, in the case of the latter, from the colonial free for all at the end of the 19th century and culminating in the collapse of the Second German Empire, after WW1. As far as the Middle East is concerned, Messrs Sykes and Picot have much to answer for, although they were only doing their masters’ bidding. Then it was all about who got the oil. Now, besides that, it’s also about religion. We created the mess and it might be up to us to sort it out. Africa is still a work in progress.
Sorry, that second ‘latter’ should have been ‘former’.
@ John Marriott “Messrs Sykes and Picot have much to answer for, although they were only doing their masters’ bidding”. Indeed they do.
‘their Masters bidding’………Sorry to mention it, John, but the said Masters behind Sykes-Picot Agreement (signed in May, 1916) were H.H. Asquith and his then Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey. It was a secret treaty…. as were a number of other agreements at the time which had earlier led to the setting up of the Union of Democrat Control……… the vehicle which led to the defection of a number of talented Liberal politicians into the Labour camp.
Not the finest decision of ‘The Last of the Romans’, although admittedly it was during a Lib-Con Coalition. Squiff’s successor,Lloyd George, implemented it with great enthusiasm in 1917.
Competition for influence in Persia was particularly fraught in the latter half of the 19th century as the Tsarist empire expanded Southwards through the caucuses and central aria, posing a strategic threat to British interests in India. The Shah and his entourage (but not the general population) was able to live lavishly on bribes from the participants in what was called “the great game.”
Admiral Jackie Fisher recognized the strategic importance of secure oil supplies to the Royal Navy well before WW1 and was successful in persuading the Liberal government to take a 51% stake in the Anglo-Persian oil company (effectively nationalizing the business) . The formal contract was signed off by the then 1st Lord of the Admiralty, one Winston Churchill, 11 days before the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The Sykes/Picot agreement was amended after the war. The French ceded Palestine and Mosul to the British giving Great Britain control of all of the oil fields of both Mesopotamia and Iran as well as the deepwater port of Haifa in Palestine.
Teheran was occupied by British and Russian troops in WW2 to defend against a potential German advance from the Caucasus. In 1951, the newly elected prime-minister of Iran nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil company cancelling its concessions and expropriating its assets. although compensation was to be paid from future profits. By 1953 under pressure from Britain and the United States the Shah agreed to dismiss his prime-minister in an orchestrated coup and resume the flow of cheap oil to the west. The Shah maintained his grip on Iran until 1979 when he was forced to flee the country during the Iranian revolution.
You could say there is a bit of history there.
Just heard about the Iranian rocket attack on the Al Asad airbase in Northern Iraq. No casualities reported yet, thankfully. Explosions in Erbil as well where British troops are stationed.
The Guardian latest news : “British warships, helicopters and several hundred military personnel have been put on standby of 48 hours or less for deployment in or near Iraq, ready to respond as the Iran crisis escalates.”
NO,NO, NO. Not in my name.