The Kaminski row: 2 must-read articles

The row over David Cameron’s decision to pull the Tories out of the main centre-right European grouping, the European People’s Party (EPP), and set up a new group of “extreme and rag-bag” assorted right-wingers, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), has been simmering for months.

It’s burst into the political mainstream this week, courtesy of the unlikely figure of the chief rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich. Back in July, he emailed the New Statesman’s James Macintyre with some sharp criticism of Michael Kaminski, the leader of the Tories’ new Euro grouping, who has faced accusations of anti-semitism and fascism. He has since watered down these criticisms, including on this morning’s BBC Radio 4 Today Programme. All of which has generated a lot of heat, and not a lot of light.

However, two articles published today are worth reading, both to get some perspective on the furore (which you won’t find in the tribal blogosphere, sad to say), and for their interpretation of what the row says about the Tories’ approach to Europe more generally.

The first is by Bagehot in The Economist:

As for Mr Kaminski, he now disavows, denies or attempts to finesse many of the previous actions and comments attributed to him. But even his denials contain suspicious self-contradictions, as well as disturbing moral distinctions (between Polish murderers and Nazi ones) and equations (between pogroms and some Jews’ alleged collaboration with the Soviets). At best he is a distastefully cynical demagogue. True, there are viler and more extreme politicians in both these countries. That is scant consolation. …

The Tories have renounced the parties of Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel (both in the EPP) in favour of a marginal, weak and incoherent new caucus. Their prospects of influencing European deliberations, on matters that they care about such as hedge-fund regulation, have dwindled. They have alienated and baffled other European conservatives. By abdicating the centre of European politics for the fringe, the Tories have convinced many in Europe that they can legitimately be ignored. …

… one explanation for the manoeuvre, offered in private by some close to Mr Cameron, that makes a bit of sense. Unfortunately, while it helps to rationalise his approach to the European Parliament, it also suggests a much bigger worry. … by making the pledge and, eventually, by keeping it he convinced his party not only to make him its leader, but also to swallow the reforms and reversals he subsequently imposed. … Seeing the move as a ransom paid to his party may be the best excuse for the moral compromises and apparent political myopia it involved. …

… it also raises an awkward question about his future. It is this: if this shoddy, shaming alliance is the price he was obliged to pay his party for the changes needed to make it seem modern and compassionate, what sort of party is it that Mr Cameron leads? What else will its members demand, and what else—when his popularity and authority wane—will he be obliged to give them, after he becomes prime minister?

And the second is by Toby Helm on the Guardian’s Politics blog:

As I can tell from just one day talking to foreign leaders and their people in Brussels, this is a much, much bigger issue than one about what Schudrich said/meant/thought a few weeks ago and what he says/means/thinks now.

Schudrich apart, there are many prominent Jews in Europe and the US who are concerned about David Cameron’s new allies. And there is almost universal disbelief in mainstream parties in the EU – centre-left and right – about what he has done by opting to team up with people who, to put it mildly, are from the European political fringes. …

The views of Cameron’s friends such as Kamiński – and the divided opinions of leading Jews and others about them – are telling and interesting. But the wider importance of splitting off from the mainstream is the far bigger issue. The view of people here is that the Tories are just not in the game any more.

Both are well worth reading in full.

Read more by or more about , , , , or .
This entry was posted in Europe / International and News.


  • Martin Kinsella 30th Oct '09 - 6:48pm

    James McIntyre is some ranting leftie Polemicist.

    Why do we, as a party, have to continually act as stooges to Labour. Can we not have equi-distance between both parties and try to take seats off both.

    This story is a storm in a teacup AFAIC.

    At the next election we need to take seats from Labour. This blogpost (expanded in The Guardian) shows Labour has some dodgy friends in Europe as well.

    Why not hammer both ?

  • Martin Kinsella 30th Oct '09 - 6:50pm

    Sorry, this was the blogpost.

    Confirmed in Comment is Free.

  • Problem is that apart from a few assorted lefties,Guardian readers,nobody gives a stuff which group of MEP’s sit with whom.Closer examination reveals that there are lunies in the groups.

    I guess it shows the sheer desperation of lefties that this camapign about the waffen ss in assorted EU states and whether this guy said this or that sometime in the past has gone on for weeks in the Guardian et al and yet the Tory poll leads have remained remarkably solid,time to change the record?

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • matt
    I am devastated to say the least by these new changes to visa rules. My life took a major turn of events last year and i separated from my Husband of 25 year...
  • Robin Stafford
    Christmas lunch today with 18-20 friends in a target seat. Mostly traditional Torys and they know my politics. Overall view? Who is Ed Davey and what do LibDems...
  • Nonconformistradical
    @Tom Harney How would you define ready? What are your smart objectives - you’ll need those to define ready?...
  • Tom Harney
    My opinion is that when talking about a General Election almost the only thing we can control is whether the party is ready for it....
  • Peter Hirst
    We are all mentally healthy at birth. What is needed is some basic knowledge about how our minds work and what can go wrong with them. It is even more important...