David Miliband Ducks the Issue
Posted by jonathanfryer on Tuesday, 28th October, 2008
The Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid al-Muallem, has been visiting London, which made yesterday’s US helicopter assault on an alleged senior al-Qaida operative inside Syria unfortunately timed for Britain’s and Europe’s efforts to bring Syria in from the diplomatic cold. Mr al-Muallem and his British counterpart, David Miliband, were due to hold a joint press conference following their talks, but this was cancelled, as our Foreign Secretary repotedly did not wish to answer questions about the US attack. I bet he didn’t.
Meanwhile, the Syrians – who say the fatalities were all local civilians — are screaming justifiably but impotently and both Iran and Russia have joined in the condemnation of what Mr al-Muallem described as Washington’s ‘cowboy politics’. The British government is keeping schtum. That is inevitably being interpreted across the Middle East as tacit approval for what the Americans have done.
One would have thought that during the twilight weeks of the Bush presisidency, the Bush Doctrine would have been quietly laid to rest. But not a bit of it. Pre-emptive strikes and raids into sovereign territory — recently in Pakistan too — continue, with apparently not a care about ‘collateral damage’. The families of the deceased are naturally grieving. But the wider Islamic world is angry. And David Miliband’s silence looks miserably like complicity.
Liz Williams said
I don’t find it particularly surprising that the Bush presidency would pull a stunt of this kind as the election approaches – except in the sense that it doesn’t seem quite big enough to qualify as a proper October Surprise.
jonathanfryer said
Yes, Liz; I dread to think what Bush, Cheney and Co have up their sleaves as a going-away present for the world!
Luis Vega said
“Bush, Cheney & Co.” reporting.
Relax. There is no ‘October surprise’ coming other than polls getting closer as Election Day approaches and American voters decide what kind of experience is relevant for a president at times of war and hard economic times. Is it the 80′s or 90′s model? Ronald Reagan or Clinton?
Young voters do not remember Reagan. He presided over huge deficits that mandated radical domestic reform while expanding the military to defeat a bellicose USSR with its communist tentacles in Central America (i.e. Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Grenada). Millions dead, displaced, sacrificed to the altar of Leftist ideology – Latinos.
Clinton inherited a prosperous world at peace. Communism defeated in Europe (Berlin Wall) and Latin America, ecomomic expansion the new mantra, “The End of History” by Francis Fukuyama in 1989 the dominant philosophy, reduction of defense budgets and geographic military retreat the strategy to balance the budget. In the 90′s America’s world supremacy began to be challenged by terrorist acts domestic and foreign.
Of course, as Election Day appproaches polls begin to show a closer race between McCain and Obama. It takes a while for mature Americans to remember important events of recent times – since national media fails to inform us of what’s at stake. Ratings, popularity and profits guides them. It’s business.
The ‘October surprise’ by “Bush, Cheney & Co.” actually happened in November: it’s called Alaska governor Sarah Palin aka Caribou Barbie, also G.I. Sarah. Watch very carefully, Republicans might still win again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Jane