Miliband Goes the Full Henry Jackson 110


Full on neo-con philosophy underpinned Miliband’s “speech” to the Royal Institute of International Affairs yesterday. Miliband acknowledged that our bombing of Libya back to the stone age was the root cause of the boat people crisis.

Sirte-destroyed-1

Sirte-destroyed-2

But Miliband was not admitting that the Guernica style massacre was wrong – he voted for it. No, he was going the full Henry Jackson and arguing that what had been needed was neo-colonial occupation of Libya in order to reform its institutions – precisely as had been done in Iraq. And we all know how that went.

This is a blow to those who believed that Miliband was different from Blair, Brown, Murphy and his brother. In fact, the entire “speech” could have been written by the Henry Jackson Society. It bemoans the decline of the authority of international institutions like the UN and International Court of Justice, but states that this is because they had failed – and failed in particular to back western military intervention everywhere. Miliband argues that the solution is for individual states to take unilateral armed action abroad, but bemoans that this is more difficult because of cuts in western defence budgets. He wants increased defence spending to fund increased military intervention abroad. He does not acknowledge that it is precisely unilateral western military action in attacking other states which has destroyed the authority of the UN in the first place.

The “speech” is in fact a series of slogans, loosely connected. Both the content and the style say a huge amount about the depths to which our civic society has sunk. The prospect of this intellectual midget and neo-con lickspittle becoming Prime Minister is frankly appalling.

The RIIA, better known as Chatham House, does not normally hear lectures written by somebody incapable of constructing a paragraph of more than ten words. It would give me great pleasure if you would be so kind just to glance at the lecture I gave to Chatham House eleven years ago. Of course it is on a much more specific subject than Miliband’s neo-con declaration of faith, but I still feel I come rather well out of the contrast.

Rather like those Soviet parade photos where the nomenklatura got airbrushed out after execution, all trace of my lecture has disappeared from the Chatham House website.


110 thoughts on “Miliband Goes the Full Henry Jackson

1 2 3 4
  • John Spencer-Davis

    Craig

    “The prospect of this intellectual midget and neo-con lickspittle becoming Prime Minister is frankly appalling.”

    Saddest of all perhaps is that he is the son of the author of “The State in Capitalist Society”.

    Great lecture. Thank you.

    Kind regards,

    John

  • fedup

    During Gaddafi’s reign;

    Libyans had free housing!
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had free electricity
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had free health care
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had free water
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had free schooling
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had security
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libyans had jobs and were employed
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Libya was not a failed state
    But he was a dictator, and the Libyans had no freedom of speech

    Thank fuck we gave them the opportunity to have freedom of speech, those Libyans have no need for;

    Free Housing
    Free health care
    Free schooling
    Free Electricity
    Free water
    Law and order
    Security
    Employment
    Stable country

    Those Libyans have all the freedom they need instead.

    Pitiful rationalisation of the delusions of psychotics bent on destruction of countries, cultures, and swathes of people for the benefit of keeping the fraudulent monetary system intact and the protection of safe heavens thereof.

  • Resident Dissident

    While it is quite clear what you are against Craig I’m afraid I struggle somewhat to see what you are for – the last para of your Chatham House lecture said

    “That was certainly my daily perception in Tashkent, and my aim there was to distance the UK and articulate a distinctive British policy based on support for human rights and the rule of international law.”

    Quite what that policy would have translated into when Ghaddadfi was in power and how it should be applied to Assad and Putin is still somewhat vague. Does support for human rights actually mean doing nothing? John Stuart Mill supported liberal interventionism in a number of cases – but I see little modern day equivalent of the when and how, just a blanket rejection of intervention and a getting into bed with the egregious creatures who actually support the totalitarians. If people really want an “ethical foreign policy” then it is necessary to put some flesh on the bones rather than trying to define oneself by reference to opponents who don’t really think very deeply about the subject.

  • Resident Dissident

    Of course some lost rather more than freedom of speech under Ghaddafi

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Libya

    But Nevermind seems to have forgotten that bit. He also seems to have rather glossed over the bit of Craig’s speech that called for a “British policy based on support for human rights” or perhaps he reads “support for” as “ignoring”?

  • craig Post author

    ResDis

    As Libya and Iraq prove, bombing somewhere to pieces does not improve the human rights of the inhabitants. There are all kinds of means of political and economic incentive and disapprobation which can tend to press the right way. But we can only have limited influence – you can’t immediately transform other countries. Nor should you.

  • Resident Dissident

    Craig

    I don’t disagree – but perhaps one way of opposing the bombing to pieces route is to be a little more concrete about the “all kinds of means of political and economic incentive and disapprobation” route. When Miliband says that people are not addressing the “what should be done question” properly it does provide an alternative rather than just the tribal noise we hear at present.

  • Resident Dissident

    Perhaps it is worth going back to Craig’s original speech on Uzbekistan and reflecting how Putin and Karimov are now building up something of a relationship involving forgiveness of Uzbek debts, mutual visits and support for totalitarian methods.

  • John Goss

    “Rather like those Soviet parade photos where the nomenklatura got airbrushed out after execution, all trace of my lecture has disappeared from the Chatham House website.”

    That’s because much of what you said was accurate (excluding your prediction of Karimov’s overthrow). You were certainly right here.

    “But what worries me most – what absolutely terrifies me – is the thought that such poor intelligence material, endorsed by someone in the last gasps of agony, given credence by some gung-ho Whitehall Warrior – can be used to keep some poor soul locked up in Belmarsh Prison. Without trial or charge, without any idea what he is accused of, day on day, week upon week, year by weary year.

    And what I was seeing was only about Uzbekistan. There is great international concern at the use of torture worldwide in the War on Terror, not just in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay but including the transport of detainees worldwide by the US authorities, delivered to governments which torture, in plain contravention of Article V of the UN Convention.”

  • Summerhead

    While Craig has undoubted experience, knowledge and wisdom on the affairs of the world, I think it is wrong to assume he knows everything. I have Tweeted this article (although Craig’s Twitter titles leave a lot to be desired) but I do wish he’d admit that he might not be wholly right about his utter dislike of Gaddafi which seems to be based on the corporate media narrative fed to the West over decades.

  • Macky

    “Rather like those Soviet parade photos where the nomenklatura got airbrushed out after execution”

    It wouldn’t be a typical Craig Murray Post without the trademark anti-Russian dig.

  • John Goss

    “I wonder if it might strike Mr Goss that one of the reasons why Karimov has not been overthrown is the support that he has received from the “decent” Mr Putin. Which I somehow doubt is consistent with Craig’s idea as to how foreign policy should work.”

    What strikes Mr Goss is this. Relations between Uzbekistan and Russia were deteriorating and it was the US which established a base there, not Russia. The US imposed sanctions against Russia so Russia was pushed by the west into finding new sources of food supply: the purpose of his visit. So yes I agree that the US forged this alliance which would otherwise not have occurred.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    That right, Mr Goss – it’s the Americans again. It always is with you, isn’t it.

    The typical Useful Idiot syndrome.

  • Mary

    Cross posting my comment on Greenstock from the previous thread.

    Back to Libya. I heard the euphemism of the decade on yesterday’s World At One. Martha Kearney interviewed Jeremy Greenstock about Miliband’s accusations.

    He said “Former colleagues of mine like Dominic Asquith tried extremely hard to help the Libyans with their reformation of political compromise after Qaddafi left”!
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05r6wyh#auto @ 11:42

    ‘Gaddafi left’. Did he indeed. What lies. What trickery.

    Greenstock got Blair’s war on Iraq through the UN. This is where he is now.

    ‘Gatehouse Advisory Partners works with its clients to assess and respond to geopolitical risk

    Founded by Sir Jeremy Greenstock and Sir David Manning, Gatehouse draws from a global network of diplomats, politicians, journalists, senior civil servants, military officials, academics and industry leaders from around the globe to deliver a unique and rounded insight into geopolitical risk.

    Gatehouse does not write long white papers. The world moves too fast. Our clients want to understand what lies beneath the headlines, hear from experts with direct experience of events on the ground and test their assumptions through challenging discussion.’
    http://gatehouseadvisorypartners.com/about-us/

    Looks hard and calculating. BP, De La Rue, all the usual connections.
    http://gatehouseadvisorypartners.com/the-team/sir-jeremy-greenstock/

    @ the Ditchley Foundation too.

    The FCO has responsibility for much of the atrocity.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Greenstock

    He has also been an advisor to the International Rescue Committee UK. Miliband D runs the US version – £300k + pa.

    What do they actually do?
    https://www.rescue-uk.org/who-we-are/our-staff-and-board

    47% funded by DFiD !!
    https://www.rescue-uk.org/who-we-are/our-finances

    ~~

    There is a PS. Manning is the one who trails around with the royals and who mentored the princes!

    The usual stuff. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manning
    and one of Gould’s predecessors in Tel Aviv I see.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Gospodin Goss

    By the way, this new thread came along in the nick of time after you were floundering to defend your baseless assertions on the previous one, eh?

    Count yourself lucky yet again. 🙂

  • John Goss

    “Rather like those Soviet parade photos where the nomenklatura got airbrushed out after execution”

    It wouldn’t be a typical Craig Murray Post without the trademark anti-Russian dig.
    ————————————————

    I think it is all credit that this is not going on today outside of the Kiev Comic (Kyiv Post) and a few blogs. The Russian evidence for MH17 being tracked by a fighter plane produced a few days after the event has not been disputed by the US government yet it has still not produced the evidence it says it has that Russia shot it down with a BUK missile.

    Yet to go to war with Iraq they stuck Colin Powell in front of the world with a load of concocted images of weapons of mass destruction which were just not there.

  • ToivoS

    I have to agree with Craig’s assessment of what has happened in Libya. But as an American I really cannot take seriously what any major Brit politician has to say about international events — they have shown themselves over and over again as nothing more than poodles for American power. The problem resides inside the US. Once the US (if it ever does) come to its senses then we can expect to see the Brits obediently following. Without that Labor, tories, Lib Dems or whatever will not (or so far have not shown any ability to) change their thinking.

  • Resident Dissident

    Goss

    Of course the visit had nothing to do with writing off the Uzbek debt so that they could buy more weapons from Putin or trying to get Uzbekistan into the Eurasian Union and so add to the cordon sanitaire against colour revolutions. If Putin is looking to Uzbekistan for food then I’m afraid we need to add stupidity to his many faults.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Mary

    “Cross posting my comment on Greenstock from the previous thread. etc..etc…”

    ______________________

    You see, Mary, had you shown just a little patience and restrained yourself from going off topic there would have been no need for you to post about Libya on the previous thread and no need to cross-post into this one.

    Do please remain continent.

  • John Goss

    “That right, Mr Goss – it’s the Americans again. It always is with you, isn’t it.

    The typical Useful Idiot syndrome.”

    When somebody hypothesises you should argue against the hypothesis and not simply resort to ad hominems, Noddy. 🙂

  • Resident Dissident

    Habba

    Don’t worry he soon replaces the old baseless assertions with new or recycled ones.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    When one of the regular posters on here chirps like a Great Tit, flies like a Great Tit and eats the same food as a Great Tit, is it ad hominem to observe that he IS a Great Tit? 🙂

  • Resident Dissident

    “When somebody hypothesises you should argue against the hypothesis and not simply resort to ad hominems, Noddy.”

    Little point in your case – prior experience shows that you are incapable of taking on a counter hypothesis – your standard techniques being limited to ignoring the response, failing to answer the questions raised, rubbishing sources and ad hominems. I’m afraid any dialectic is impossible.

  • Habbabkuk (la vita è bella)

    Res Diss

    “I’m afraid any dialectic is impossible.”

    ____________________

    Is that a polite way of saying that Mr Goss was not a star pupil at the ToyTown Party school?

  • Becky Cohen

    First off: I must say, although I’d like him to be more radical than he is, for all his faults (and we all have them) a vote for Ed Miliband – as the only comprehensive school educated party leader candidate – would certainly be a cut above voting for Cameron, Clegg or that bigoted Ukip mess. I see where Craig’s coming from here, but I will still be voting Labour on May 7th as they are the only realistic prospect that’s left against the capitalistic oligarchy.

    Secondly, I’d like to apologise to Craig for the way that I entered these threads a few weeks ago. I may not agree with a lot of what he has to say, but at least I can see that he is fair enough to allow me to voice my opinion on these threads without deleting it. All to the good too, as it makes for a far more interesting debate than having a load of people agree with each other. I’d also like to see Craig venture into other current issues as well as foreign affairs – and would love to read his opinion on the latest Jamelia controversy, for example.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.