Latest news with #neo-Nazi-sympathising
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lammy is endangering our national security
When David Lammy, our gaffe-prone Foreign Secretary, talks about 'egregious actions and rhetoric', as he did when condemning Israel's actions in Gaza, he could equally be talking about his own unimpressive track record since taking up residence in King Charles Street. His history of uttering gratuitous insults about US president Donald Trump, whom he famously dubbed 'a neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath' in 2018, has effectively made him persona non grata within the Trump administration's inner sanctum. The disinclination of serious players, such as secretary of state Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff, was clearly evident last month when they pulled out of the London Ukraine conference Lammy had organised. This left the foreign secretary in the ignominious position of having to withdraw from his own conference. Then there is his hapless handling of the Chagos Islands sell-out, where the dire national security implications of placing a prized military asset like Diego Garcia at the mercy of hostile states like China, Russia and Iran seems to have passed him by. Lammy's commitment to supporting a politically motivated attempt to prosecute Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes has caused a major rift in UK-Israel relations, with the Israeli premier declining to meet with Britain's foreign secretary when he visited Jerusalem last year. Few will be surprised by Lammy's decidedly underwhelming performance at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office given that he has struggled under the illusion that Libya in North Africa borders Syria in the eastern Mediterranean. Then there was the time when he congratulated Azerbaijan for forcing more than 100,000 Armenians to flee their homes in the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, a clear-cut case of ethnic cleansing if ever there was one. Even by his own pitiful standards, Lammy's egregious track record puts him on course to become the country's worst foreign secretary in living memory, on a par with the equally ineffectual Robin Cook, whose devotion to his so-called 'ethical foreign policy' rendered his contribution to world affairs largely irrelevant. Lammy's decision, therefore, to jump on the anti-Zionist bandwagon by suspending trade talks with Israel over its 'intolerable' military operations in Gaza is entirely in keeping with his world view. Rather than condemning the real architects of Gaza's misery, the Iranian-backed Hamas jihadis who started the conflict with their murderous October 7 assault on Israel, Lammy has gone for the easy option. Joining forces with such luminaries of global diplomacy as Kaja Kallas, the EU's high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Lammy accused the current Israeli government of isolating Israel from its friends and partners around the world through its efforts to destroy Hamas. The fact that Israel is fighting against an organisation that is proscribed in the UK because of its terrorist activities appears lost on Lammy, as is Hamas's obvious delight that the British Government has decided to publicly lambast one of its closest allies in the Middle East. Instead, the Foreign Secretary feels more at home siding with other dedicated anti-Israel activists, such as the governors of King's College, Cambridge, who have decided to divest from arms companies in protest, in part, at Israel's continued military offensive in Gaza. What Lammy and his ilk fail to understand is that, given the determination of Hamas and its Iranian backers to destroy the Jewish state, the Israelis have little alternative other than to maintain their military campaign in Gaza. Given the existential threat Israel faces from Hamas and its backers, perhaps Lammy should consider what other country would allow a terrorist organisation that had perpetrated the worst atrocity in its history to continue operating on its doorstep? But that would be to indulge in statesmanship, a quality as far removed from Lammy's skill set as his grasp of geography. So, rather than holding Hamas to account for committing murderous acts of terrorism, the British Government now finds itself in the invidious position of castigating a key ally for seeking to defend the Israeli people from suffering further acts of Islamist-inspired terrorism. By adopting such a fundamentally flawed policy towards the Gaza conflict, moreover, Lammy is inadvertently placing our own security in jeopardy. By ignoring the threat posed by a sophisticated terrorist organisation like Hamas, London is sending a message to other Islamist-inspired entities, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, that it has no interest in curbing their activities. It is surely no coincidence that, at the same time that Lammy decided to pick a fight with Israel, the security services are reporting a marked upsurge in Iranian terror activity in the UK. In terms of safeguarding the security of the British people, focusing our efforts on confronting Iran would make far more sense, with designating Iran's Revolutionary Guards, the group responsible for overseeing Tehran's anti-Western operations, a good place to start. If Lammy were to concentrate his efforts on denouncing Iran as a pariah state, as opposed to Israel, then people might start to take him seriously, and not as the joke he is today. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
For Remoaners, Starmer has just committed the ultimate betrayal
All hail Keir Starmer, who has just marked VE day by making his own history. Against all odds, this dreariest, unluckiest of Prime Ministers has somehow succeeded where so many of his predecessors failed and pulled off a landmark US-UK trade deal. How Rishi Sunak, for whom high profile Brexit wins proved frustratingly elusive, would love to have been able to announce something that sounded this good. As for Boris Johnson, who prided himself on 'delivering Brexit,' he would surely have swapped his trademark blond mop for a buzz cut to deliver this. On the face of it, it is an extraordinary triumph for Downing St, stunning all those who struggled to imagine Donald Trump doing Starmer any favours. After all, the two men could hardly be more different. Behind one set of negotiators was a dull, grey technocrat whose yearning for closer relations with the EU might have derailed all this. Behind the other set was the magnetic, mercurial, swashbuckling Trump, who despises Brussels and wants to teach its leading lights a lesson. Yet there they both were today, playing footsie across the Pond, gushing about how the deal they have struck makes the Special Relationship stronger than ever. What a coup! From the leader of a political party whose MPs, activists and grassroots supporters almost all detest Trump, the spectacle must have been a tremendous shock. Leading Labour figures like Foreign Secretary David Lammy, who not so long ago labelled the US President a 'neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath', and the UK's ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson – who once described him as a 'bully' and 'danger to the world' – may have spent the last nine months desperately trying to gloss over these old insults, but we all know what they really think. As for Labour backbenchers, few bother to conceal their contempt for the occupant of the White House. As their great leader dispensed with all formalities today, addressing the President affectionately as 'Donald' not once; not twice; but an astonishing eight times; many will have been cringeing and praying for him to stop. However, that fleeing discomfort pales into insignificance relative to other adjustments they, and the rest of the Left-leaning Establishment, must now make. For as of today, their dreams of rejoining the EU are now well and truly over. On this front, the small print of today's deal does not matter a jot. Whether it turns out to be 'so good for both countries', as Trump cheerfully proclaimed, or whether the master deal maker has stitched us up, there is now absolutely no going back. In landmark deals with both India and America, Starmer has cemented our departure from the UK. We are now on a very different path. For the many die-hards who have spent years trying to derail or reverse Brexit, it is quite a blow. That it is game over, for them, thanks to Starmer is a particularly nasty surprise. They had every reason to hope he would help. A staunch Remainer himself, the prime minister has spent much of his Premiership trying to rebuild ties with the EU. Earlier this year, he thrilled Remainers by becoming the first British prime minister since Brexit to attend an EU meeting in Brussels. Downing St has repeatedly indicated that he wants to 'reset' the UK's relationship with the bloc. All this has raised hopes among Remainers that he and his EU friends would conspire to create 'Brexit in name only'. This week's deals have put paid to all that. It will take some time to identify the various winners and losers in these agreements. Amid all the jubilation, already there are signs that some UK sectors will lose out. (Amid a deluge of cheap US agricultural products, for example, our own biggest food export – salmon – of which a quarter goes to the US, now faces a ten per cent tariff. Previously, it was zero.). If it does turn out that we have been shafted, there will be one great consolation: Remoaners will be among those Trump has put out of business. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
The Guardian
23-02-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
What can Keir Starmer say at the White House that Donald Trump might listen to?
For British prime ministers, with their ideas about the world shaped by the histories of Churchill and Roosevelt, Maggie and Ronnie, and the rest of the folklore about the transatlantic alliance, the prospect of a visit to the White House usually causes tingles of excitement. One of our senior diplomats once offered me an explanation of the allure: 'The red carpet is laid out, the national anthems are played, all that stuff is very seductive.' This will be customarily accompanied by ritualistic words about the importance and invincibility of the 'special relationship'. Number 10 lobbied hard to get Sir Keir Starmer across the Atlantic early in the second term of Donald Trump and, until recently, Downing Street people were telling themselves that an encounter between the two men needn't be a disaster and might even turn out to be a success. In the weeks since Trump's re-election as US president, UK policy might be summarised by the phrase 'Don't poke the beast'. Keep the temperature cool. Ignore provocations. Attempt to trade on British heritage – golf, the royal family – with which this US president has an affinity. Put David Lammy out there to suggest that there is lots to respect about the man whom the foreign secretary used to call a 'woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath'. Softly-softly was the doctrine and they thought it was bearing fruit. While a fusillade of blistering Trump attacks have been launched against other countries – among them places as various as Canada, Denmark, Mexico and Panama – the UK has so far avoided being whacked. While trade threats have been made against China, the EU and America's neighbours, ministers still hope the UK has a fair chance of dodging the tariff bullet. They were rather pleased with themselves at Number 10 when, a few weeks ago, the US president called Sir Keir 'a very good person' who has done 'a very good job thus far'. Perhaps, they told themselves in Downing Street, it was going to be OK. Nobody sentient in Number 10, the Foreign Office or the Ministry of Defence is relaxed now. Not after what has been unleashed over the past 10 days. As a doctrine, 'Don't poke the beast' only worked for so long as the beast chose not to bite off your leg regardless. Sir Keir, less than eight months into his term and still a relative novice in geopolitics, is flying to America this week with transatlantic relations smashed up like they have never been before. Although it is not his fault, the haunting thought for him is that the alliance forged during the Second World War is disintegrating on his watch. The first swing of the wrecking ball was Trump's declaration that he had initiated land-for-peace negotiations with Vladimir Putin over the heads of Kyiv and the European members of Nato. That ambush has been followed by the US secretary of state meeting his Russian opposite number in Saudi Arabia with Ukraine uncordially uninvited to have any say about its fate. In a deeply disturbing speech to the Munich security conference, the vice-president, JD Vance, trolled Europe by questioning whether the continent's values were worth defending, before holding a taboo-busting meeting with the leader of the far-right AfD on the eve of the German elections. We have since heard the US president falsely brand Volodymyr Zelenskyy 'a dictator' and baselessly blame Ukraine's democratically elected leader for the war that has ravaged his country. No one should really need reminding that the conflict was started three years ago by the barbaric Russian invasion intended to extinguish its smaller neighbour as an independent state. The span of the UK political spectrum has rejected the US president's regurgitation of risible Kremlin propaganda, which attempts to shift culpability from the aggressor to the victim. Even Nigel Farage, usually an unashamed cheerleader and apologist for Trumpery, has had to say he can't go along with that. Sir Keir was quick to repudiate the attack and call President Zelenskyy to express his support. Says one member of the cabinet: 'Keir has been quite ballsy about that.' One question accompanying the prime minister across the Atlantic is how 'ballsy' he is prepared to be when he is up close and personal with the US president. Should Trump repeat his smears about Ukraine, the prime minister will have a choice to make. If he responds meekly or mutely, it will be at the great risk of looking pathetically pusillanimous. If he calls it out as a calumny, it will be at the serious peril of making himself the target of the fiery wrath of this thin-skinned and vindictive US president. That's just one of the jeopardies of a visit pregnant with hazard. Another danger is that Sir Keir is greeted with a flat rebuff when he attempts to convince the American that Europe must have a role in negotiations and Ukraine has to be 'kept in the fight' to strengthen the west's hand with the Russians. Some in the UK government contend that the odds on making headway could be a bit better than they look. 'A lot of commentary is jumping way ahead of itself,' says a senior figure closely involved in the preparations for the visit. 'The Trump administration is still settling down. Even hard-declared positions change 24 hours later. There are multiple voices competing for Trump's ear.' Number 10 has spent a lot of time wondering how to make the voice of the prime minister persuasive enough to influence US policy. Trying to talk up Sir Keir as a 'bridge' between America and Europe sounds vainglorious. This US president doesn't see a bridge without wanting to blow it up. European leaders baulk at the idea of the UK representing itself as an interlocutor, especially since we are no longer a member of the EU. There's more sense in coordination with Emmanuel Macron, whose trip to Washington will precede Sir Keir's, to marshal the argument that Europe can't be excluded from decisions that critically effect the security of its own continent. Another task for the prime minister is to challenge the view, held by some in the Trump circle, that the US will profit from a deal with Putin because it will break the Russia-China alliance. I'm told that the prime minister will contend to the president that leaving Europe insecure will undermine the strategic position of the US because it will embolden aggressive moves by China and strengthen Beijing's ties with Moscow, exactly the opposite of what Washington wants. Sir Keir will also make the case that Europe is now heeding Trump on taking more responsibility for its own security. Sign up to Observed Analysis and opinion on the week's news and culture brought to you by the best Observer writers after newsletter promotion 'We've got to say to the US: 'We hear you',' says one senior minister. 'We know we must do more, more quickly.' To the ears of the president, this is likely to sound feeble unless it is backed by something firmer than a promise to raise British defence spending to 2.5% of GDP at some unspecified date in the future, which is half the 5% of GDP that Trump has lately taken to demanding. Intelligence-gleaning should be a priority for the prime minister and his team during their time in Washington. Listening to Trump and his courtiers will be at least as important as speaking. Precisely what kind of deal do the Americans think they can land with the Kremlin? That would be worth knowing, even if the answer turns out to be a scary one. Forewarned is forearmed. The truth may very well be that members of the Trump regime haven't settled upon or don't agree among themselves about their desired endpoint. Diplomats reckon that there is one approach with the greatest potential to have traction on this occupant of the Oval Office. That is to appeal to his ego and self-interest with the warning that a dirty carve-up of Ukraine on the Kremlin's terms will project Putin as the apex predator and leave the US president looking like a weak dupe. Kim Darroch, a former UK ambassador to the US, suggests: 'If I were Starmer, I would say to Trump that this is your chance for your place in history, the man who brought peace and ended this war. But it has to be a fair deal. If it's a bad deal, you are not going to get that praise, you are going to get a load of criticism and that will be your record in the history books.' Vanity is one of the more reliable traits of Donald Trump. Leaning into his narcissism may be undignified, but it may also be essential if Sir Keir is to come home from Washington with anything that he can call a success. Andrew Rawnsley is the Chief Political Commentator of the Observer
Khaleej Times
12-02-2025
- Business
- Khaleej Times
Flattery and pragmatism: UK plan to stay on Trump's good side
With its flattering rhetoric, leniency in responding to US trade threats and alignment with Washington this week at a summit on artificial intelligence, the United Kingdom has signalled a willingness to take President Donald Trump's side over Europe. "The UK has no closer ally than America," Britain's newly appointed ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson, said on Tuesday, in a video overflowing with superlatives posted on Elon Musk's X platform. The Labour party grandee, formerly a European commissioner, had told the BBC on Monday that Britain has "to respect and understand what drives (Trump), what his mandate is to do, and how his allies need to adjust sometimes". David Lammy, Britain's top diplomat, also lavished praise on Trump last month, saying he displayed "incredible grace and generosity" and was "very funny, very friendly, very warm" during their meeting last September. The comments were somewhat more complimentary than previous remarks by Lammy in which he called Trump a "woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath". The conciliatory tone is "likely to be calculated at keeping the UK out of Trump's crosshairs when it comes to tariffs and any other forms of aggressive US foreign policy," said Michael Plouffe, an associate professor at UCL university in London. Jonathan Portes, an economist at King's College London, said "the UK, as usual, is trying to have its cake and eat it". "This is perfectly rational and sensible," he added. "It is hoping to avoid the worst excesses of Trump at the same time as it pursues its rapprochement with the EU." 'Makes sense' The European Union remains by far Britain's largest trading partner, but London has dreamt of a trade agreement with Washington, which Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently called for, since leaving the bloc. Faced with the frenetic start to Trump's presidency and his unpredictable diplomatic manoeuvrings, Starmer has in recent days made strategic choices to distance himself from the Europeans. There is no question of Britain joining the EU's countermeasures promised on Tuesday in response to Trump's newly announced 25-percent customs duties on steel and aluminium, which the United States will impose from March 12. Britain instead says that it is "engaging" with the United States on the details of the tariffs. "What British industry needs and deserves is not a knee-jerk reaction but a cool and clear-headed sense of the UK's national interest based on a full assessment of all the implications of the US's actions," said British trade minister Douglas Alexander. London also sided against the EU on the crucial issue of artificial intelligence, teaming up with the United States in refusing to sign the final declaration of the AI summit in Paris on Tuesday. "We felt the declaration didn't provide enough practical clarity on global governance, nor sufficiently address harder questions around national security and the challenge AI poses to it," said a British government spokesperson. This "cautious approach to the US" over AI is aligned with Starmer's promise to make the Britain a world leader in the sector, said Plouffe. It also "makes sense" that Starmer would avoid "antagonism with the state that is home to three of the leading AI providers", he added. "This may win some favour with Trump" at a time when the digital giants, who have become the Republican's close allies, are locked in regulatory disputes with the EU. "I think he's done a very good job thus far," Trump said of Starmer in late January. "I like him a lot." But can the British strategy work in the long term? "That depends on just how confrontational Trump is with the EU and whether he wants to try to lever the UK away from the EU," Portes said. "Since nobody -- including him -- knows what he's going to do, I certainly don't," he added.
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Flattery and pragmatism: UK plan to stay on Trump's good side
With its flattering rhetoric, leniency in responding to US trade threats and alignment with Washington this week at a summit on artificial intelligence, the United Kingdom has signalled a willingness to take President Donald Trump's side over Europe. "The UK has no closer ally than America," Britain's newly appointed ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson, said on Tuesday, in a video overflowing with superlatives posted on Elon Musk's X platform. The Labour party grandee, formerly a European commissioner, had told the BBC on Monday that Britain has "to respect and understand what drives (Trump), what his mandate is to do, and how his allies need to adjust sometimes". David Lammy, Britain's top diplomat, also lavished praise on Trump last month, saying he displayed "incredible grace and generosity" and was "very funny, very friendly, very warm" during their meeting last September. The comments were somewhat more complimentary than previous remarks by Lammy in which he called Trump a "woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath". The conciliatory tone is "likely to be calculated at keeping the UK out of Trump's crosshairs when it comes to tariffs and any other forms of aggressive US foreign policy," said Michael Plouffe, an associate professor at UCL university in London. Jonathan Portes, an economist at King's College London, said "the UK, as usual, is trying to have its cake and eat it". "This is perfectly rational and sensible," he added. "It is hoping to avoid the worst excesses of Trump at the same time as it pursues its rapprochement with the EU." - 'Makes sense' - The European Union remains by far Britain's largest trading partner, but London has dreamt of a trade agreement with Washington, which Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently called for, since leaving the bloc. Faced with the frenetic start to Trump's presidency and his unpredictable diplomatic manoeuvrings, Starmer has in recent days made strategic choices to distance himself from the Europeans. There is no question of Britain joining the EU's countermeasures promised on Tuesday in response to Trump's newly announced 25-percent customs duties on steel and aluminium, which the United States will impose from March 12. Britain instead says that it is "engaging" with the United States on the details of the tariffs. "What British industry needs and deserves is not a knee-jerk reaction but a cool and clear-headed sense of the UK's national interest based on a full assessment of all the implications of the US's actions," said British trade minister Douglas Alexander. London also sided against the EU on the crucial issue of artificial intelligence, teaming up with the United States in refusing to sign the final declaration of the AI summit in Paris on Tuesday. "We felt the declaration didn't provide enough practical clarity on global governance, nor sufficiently address harder questions around national security and the challenge AI poses to it," said a British government spokesperson. This "cautious approach to the US" over AI is aligned with Starmer's promise to make the Britain a world leader in the sector, said Plouffe. It also "makes sense" that Starmer would avoid "antagonism with the state that is home to three of the leading AI providers", he added. "This may win some favour with Trump" at a time when the digital giants, who have become the Republican's close allies, are locked in regulatory disputes with the EU. "I think he's done a very good job thus far," Trump said of Starmer in late January. "I like him a lot." But can the British strategy work in the long term? "That depends on just how confrontational Trump is with the EU and whether he wants to try to lever the UK away from the EU," Portes said. "Since nobody -- including him -- knows what he's going to do, I certainly don't," he added. zap/jwp/jhb/dhw
