Blog 2023 Malcolm Blair-Robinson

General Petraeus and President Karzai

The general is annoyed with the president because Karzai has criticised the level of violence, especially at night, mostly of U.S forces, in the drive to crush the Taliban. For once I think President Karzai is right.

The Taliban will never be crushed. Even if they are put out of action they will re-emerge. That is the tribal, war lord culture of Afghanistan. Thus General Petraeus’s strategy is self defeating. The more the violence and crushing of Afghans of whatever hue by NATO, the greater the resentment among the innocent population and the more they will side with anyone willing to kick at foreign troops. Moreover when NATO leaves the greater will be the willingness of the so called Security Forces to change sides.

This corrupt and ramshackle government of Afghanistan is, however the government NATO recognises, and the one it helped install and props up in power. Therefore General Petraeus must recognise Karzai’s right to speak out and his authority in doing so. If he does not, the whole enterprise is a sham.

David Cameron and Foreign Policy

In his Mansion House Speech on Monday evening David Cameron, as is the tradition of this annual Prime Ministerial visit to the City of London, set out his, and therefore the government’s, view of the nature of British foreign policy in future. For the first time since the end of the cold war, we heard of a new, pragmatic approach which would put British interests, meaning British economic interests, before everything else.

Being economically strong and commercially active is a far better way to gain influence than, in the modern world, power projection, confrontation and endless lectures about human rights and democracy. At the end of the day the latter two hold little attraction if the price you pay is being blown up when you go to market, starvation through famine, living without electric power and all the other suffering now apparent in countries upon whom the West has sanctimoniously imposed its own government model.

If we start to pay attention to how we can sell to China, Russia, India, Brazil and Turkey, countries sniffed at and largely ignored by officials in the past (if not by enterprising business people) we shall be on the way to reinventing ourselves as a Tiger, or rather a Bulldog economy, which will help to get us out of the horrendous financial mess the latter period of Thatcherism and the entire stewardship of New Labour dumped us into.

Much has to be done at home to make our economy competitive. This is not easy when the government has to borrow one in every four pounds pound it spends and when our total national and private indebtedness is the second largest in the world. The largest, that of the U.S is one and a half times bigger, but its population is bigger by five times. 

That is why we need to get to work to pursue our own interests. The Prime Minister is showing, perhaps to many this is surprising, a refreshingly clear of understanding of what has to be done. He also talked of lack of preparedness for the wars on which we had embarked and a lack of strategic understanding of where they were headed. Good stuff.

A Royal Wedding

Most of the world seems to be rejoicing at the happy news. Whatever their attitude to the institution of monarchy, people love a royal wedding, the stuff of  fairy tales for generations.

In fact a marriage of a direct heir to the throne is in the U.K., nowadays, rare. I have seen three;  the Queen herself, Prince Charles and now Prince William. My father was born when Queen Victoria was still going strong and he died when Elizabeth II had been Queen for six years. During his life there had been six separate monarchs, two queens and four kings. Today anyone under fifty eight has  known only one.

At such a time as this all thoughts are of happiness and to the future. The sombre failure of the last such marriage of Charles and Diana is forgotten. Diana was in no way prepared for a royal marriage which is so much more than an everyday romantic partnership. It is the maintenance of a dynasty, a pillar of the constitution and a key part of the abilty of the state to renew itself. The romantic element is, in all of this, quite incidental. There is some evidence now that Diana was the candidate of her grandmother Lady Fermoy who was close to the Queen Mother. Charles was persuaded, against his better judgement and when not really in love, to take the plunge.

The prospects for William and Kate are altogether better. Not only do the the pair know each other really well and are best friends, but every effort has been made to show Kate all aspects of what it really means to enter that gilded cage where one becomes almost the property of the state and a prisoner of the establishment. She believes she can handle it and all the country thinks she can too.

There is something more. Diana did not find her feet until after the divorce. When she did, she brought a style of royalty the people not only admired, but preferred. She was, as Blair said (and Campbell prompted), the people’s Princess. Almost everyone has a story of a Diana contact or kindess and if they do not have a personal experiece they know someone who does. Diana, cast from the cage, brought monarchy to the people. They loved her for it.

There are signs that Prince William understands that. When his turn comes he will seek to be the people’s king. At his side Kate, or Catherine as she is to be known (will that work?) will be an ideal people’s queen. That will be Diana’s final and lasting legacy.