Category Archives: Politics

Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Sir Keir Starmer and the UK Labour Party

BRITAIN

FOR the first time in 14 years, and following an accurate exit poll, we have a Labour government. As protocol states, Sir Keir Starmer travelled to Buckingham Palace for an audience with King Charles III. In that historic setting, the Monarch invited Sir Keir to formally become the 58th Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and to form a Government.

The people of the UK have spoken, and Labour has convincingly won the election by a healthy majority.

There are many others, of course, who will be disappointed. But it is important to remember that our democracy can only function if the losers of a free and fair election graciously accept the result. As they have.

There is little doubt Sir Keir has turned his party around since becoming its leader.

Previously, it was slipping towards irrelevance under Jeremy Corbyn. Sir Keir set about expunging its Marxist policies and MPs, and has tackled the scourge of anti-Semitism with some success.

Transforming Labour into the party it is today has surely tested his mettle. Yet it is now that the hard work really needs to begin.

However, other than saying he puts “country first, party second” and wants “change”, Sir Keir has left voters with little clue about what he intends to do in power or how he would tackle the country’s many problems.

Wealth creation is his priority, but we know he will saddle business with a slew of new rules and obligations, while driving rich foreigners overseas by abolishing non-dom tax status.

Relying, as he does, on faster economic growth to pay for better public services is welcome. But what will fuel such a miraculous turnaround?

Of course, creating a stable political environment can help. Trade union reforms put forward by Angela Raynor, however, and a plan by Labour to give workers more rights, would likely inhibit that progress.

As a result, the party will inevitably need to raise money to fund its “agenda for change”.

Since it has pledged not to borrow more and will not slash public spending, the answer is likely to be taxing businesses, pensions, property, and inheritance. The politics of envy may soon surface.

Despite Sir Keir’s insistence that Labour can be trusted with defence, he has refused to commit to boost our dangerously depleted military to 2.5% of GDP. And that raises questions of whether the UK will be in a position to continue helping Ukraine in its war with Russia.

On soaring levels of immigration, which is putting intolerable strain on public services and social cohesion, and Sir Keir saying he will scrap the Rwanda scheme for illegal immigrants, Labour has offered no fresh thinking.

Other questions are multiplying. Given the need for energy security in a volatile world, is Sir Keir really going to ban new drilling licences for North Sea oil and gas? And what of Labour’s dogmatic target to decarbonise electricity by 2030? Quite clearly, that would risk the lights going out.

And will Sir Keir defend the ancient freedoms of the press? That’s essential in holding the powerful to account in a free and democratic society like the UK.

The millions of voters that have given him the landslide victory, Sir Keir must use it for the good of the whole nation – not just Left-wing interest groups.

For the Conservative Party, a disaster at the ballot box never seen before in its history, must lead to a period of reflection.

Over the years, the Conservatives have boasted of being a broad church, encompassing a wide range of views. Today, the congregation seems to have no unifying creed at all. This schism will continue with members moving to the far-right Reform UK Party led by Nigel Farage unless solutions can be found in stabilising traditional Conservative values and principles within the party.

Standard
Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Starmerspeak and the dangers that lurk

THE UK LABOUR PARTY

POLITICAL language, observed George Orwell, “is designed to make lies sound truthful …and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Euphemism, ambiguity, and “sheer cloudy vagueness” are deployed by politicians, he said, to conceal their true intentions and lull the people into a false sense of security.

Orwell wrote those words almost eight decades ago, yet they are as true today as they were then. Indeed, in Sir Keir Starmer they may have reached their apotheosis.

Labour party’s manifesto – in which Sir Keir’s photo appears 33 times – is a veritable typhoon of pure wind.

He presents himself as a man of action, saying “the time for reviews is over” – then proceeds to announce some 16 new reviews into everything from health to defence.

Wealth creation is ostensibly a key priority, yet he would saddle business with a slew of new rules and obligations, while simultaneously driving wealthy foreigners away by abolishing non-dom tax status.

Sir Keir says he puts “country before party,” yet throws red meat to Labour activists with spiteful measures such as stripping elderly soldiers who served in Ulster up to 50 years ago of their legal immunity from prosecution, and, of course, the tax raid on independent schools.

Labour’s “green revolution” is also a sham, Starmer falsely claiming that renewables will be capable of fulfilling our energy needs by 2030. That’s just six years away. Even if he covered half the country in wind turbines, we would still need oil, gas, and nuclear to keep the lights on.

Yet the most glaring falsehood in this tawdry document is that Labour’s “agenda for change” can be funded with just a few minor tax rises.

An extra 13,000 police offices, 8,500 mental health staff, 6,500 teachers, 1.5million homes, nationalising rail, a new state energy company – where’s the cash coming from?

Estimates of the size of Labour’s fiscal black hole vary, but most analysts believe it to be in the tens of billions. Sir Keir claims the shortfall can be covered by economic growth. The reality is that taxes and borrowing are certain to rise.

He has ruled out increases in income and corporation tax, national insurance, and VAT, but there are plenty of other options, such as raiding pension funds (again), wealth, fuel, and property taxes, extending capital gains tax, and much more.

Instead of being told what’s coming down the line, voters are being shamelessly fobbed off. In his novel 1984, Orwell gave deceitful political language a name – Newspeak. Starmerspeak is its modern-day manifestation.

Despite Sir Keir’s unwillingness to give straight answers, he’s on course to win with a “super-majority” – especially if traditional Conservatives are foolish enough to switch their vote to Reform UK.

Their anger and revolt are entirely understandable, but Reform is a sideshow. They must weigh the desire to punish their own party into oblivion against the consequences of propelling a self-professed socialist into government with virtually no checks and balances.

Standard
Britain, History, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Politics, Saudi Arabia, Society, United States

Middle East history. It needs to be understood.

MIDDLE EAST

Ancient indifferences are reshaping the Middle East and forging unlikely new alliances

GEOPOLITICAL statements come no more obscure than one given earlier this week by an Israeli news site.

A member of the Saudi Arabian royal family had reportedly told the broadcaster Kan that, in his view, Iran had started the Gaza war by instructing its proxy group Hamas to attack Israel on October 7.

Tehran’s attention, according to this nameless royal, was to thwart the imminent normalisation of diplomatic relations between Israel and the Saudis.

This is so important because it symbolises the extraordinary transformation under way in the politics of the Middle East. For a Saudi royal to express such a view – that a Muslim country instigated the conflict for the purpose of spreading discord – would have been unimaginable only a few years ago. But that’s not the only way in which the winds of change are resettling alliances in this volatile region.

Five days ago, the ayatollahs of Iran inflicted their first direct attack on Israel since they came to power in 1979.

For some 45 years, the Islamic Republic has plotted the destruction of what its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei calls “the evil Zionist regime”. But it has left the actual attacks to its proxies, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.

This fresh assault did almost no damage, thanks to the defensive coalition that shot down almost all of the weapons directed at Israel.

The US and UK played a role in this. But they were joined by two other countries for whom defending the Jewish state would have been fanciful until recently: Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

For most of the time Israel has existed, Saudi, as one of the leading Muslim nations and home to the holy city of Mecca, has been its implacable foe. But now it is on the verge not just of tolerating Israel but becoming an ally.

Similarly, back in 1967, Jordan actually invaded Israel – a disastrous move which lost it the territories of East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Yet now Jordan, too, has stood alongside Israel to protect it from Iranian bombs. This newfound cooperative spirit continues apace: it has emerged that both the Saudis and the United Arab Emirates had passed helpful intelligence to America to use in Israel’s defence, with Jordan further agreeing to let the US and “other countries’ warplanes” use its airspace, as well as sending up its own jets. The rise of Iran – and its chilling proximity to a nuclear weapon – has driven old foes closer.

Iran now dominates a vast region from its borders with Iraq, through Syria and Lebanon, to the Mediterranean. Through its Yemeni proxies, the Houthis, and its own navy, it is causing chaos and major disruption in the key Red Sea trade route.

And it has turned the Palestinian cause into a strategic vehicle for its own ambitions through two other proxies, Hamas (Gaza) and Hezbollah (Lebanon). This chaotic and meddlesome statecraft has appalled other Muslim countries.

The story of the Middle East used to be “Israel versus everyone else”. However, that is no longer true. To understand how all this has come about, you need to go back to the very roots of Islam – and the schism within it. In 610AD, Mohammed unveiled a new faith. By the time he died in 632AD, he and Islam were all-powerful in Arabia, and within a century it had subjugated an empire stretching from Central Asia to Spain.

But as history teaches us, Islam was split over who should succeed the Prophet. One faction argued the leadership should be passed through his bloodline. They became known as Shias, from shi’atu Ali, Arabic for “partisans of Ali”, who was Mohammed’s cousin and son-in-law.

The others, the Sunnis (followers of the sunna, or “way” in Arabic) said leadership should be determined on merit.

Ali was elected as “caliph” (spiritual leader) in 656AD but within five years was assassinated, enshrining an enduring split.

Fast forward to 2024, and about 85 per cent of the world’s 1.6billion Muslims are Sunni, while 15 per cent are Shia.

Two countries now vie for the leadership of Islam, Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran. Since the mullahs seized power in Tehran 45 years ago, the divisions and mutual hatreds have only grown.

As a minority within Islam, the Shiites have historically been treated as subordinate in Sunni-dominated countries. But there has been a significant growth of the Shiite population in Gulf nations. This has increased anxiety among Sunni rulers over the growing power of Shia Iran.

In Gulf states such as the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and especially Saudi Arabia, the Shia threat – in other words the threat from Iran – is seen as existential.

Egypt, too, which has had a peace treaty with Israel since 1979, is also an arch enemy of the mullahs. In Israel’s 2006 Lebanon war with Hezbollah, Sunni countries were, behind the scenes, willing Israel to triumph, just as it is said now that Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia want Israel to destroy Hamas in Gaza.

The rapprochement of some Sunni countries was embodied in the 2020 Abraham Accords which normalised relations between the UAE, Bahrain, and Israel, and later Morocco and Sudan.

There is logic, then, to the deepening alliances between Sunni states and Israel. The Arab nations understand that while Israel has no ambitions to dominate its neighbours, Iran seeks to control all of the Middle East.

What’s indisputable is that if you don’t understand this split and history, you can’t understand the Middle East at all.

Standard