“May I congratulate the Prime Minister on his breathtaking degree of courage and leadership”…
David Cameron looked positively prime ministerial as members of the Commons took turns this morning to applaud him for the government’s success in securing a wide-ranging and widely-supported United Nations Security Council resolution on Libya.
Behind him, the beleaguered William Hague sat quietly lapping up a rare moment of glory. Like his distinguished predecessor Robin Cook, whose "ethical" foreign policy ended against his will in the tears and frustration and tragedy of Iraq, Hague looked rather like a garden gnome. This will not be Iraq, one could hear him thinking, because unlike then, on this occasion “we are all in this together”.
Donate to us: support independent, intelligent, in-depth Scottish journalism from just 3p a day
The deputy head boy, Nick Clegg, offered his usual supercilious raised eyebrow to anyone daring to question the government’s wisdom. Not that there was much disagreement: Tory MP Mark Reckless goaded Cameron over the government’s defence cuts, suggesting that the operation would be enhanced if the (decommissioned) aircraft carrier Ark Royal, armed with (scrapped) Harrier aircraft, could take part; Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn asked why action was being taken to protect human rights in Libya but not in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain (a question Cameron expertly avoided answering); there was an expression of concern over how long the RAF Tornados and Typhoons would have to fly missions over Libya; and would Britain become bogged down in its third war in just over a decade? No, it would not, Cameron explained, because Resolution 1973 explicitly ruled out the use of ground troops. Support from the Arab League and the African countries on the Security Council – South Africa, Gabon and Nigeria – added weight to the international commitment to protect Libyan rebels from Gaddafi, Cameron said, implying, or so it seemed, that if ground troops were ever required, it would be Arab and African troops that were involved, not British and American. Further distancing himself from the methods of Tony Blair, Cameron said the government would publish a (presumably undoctored) summary of the legal advice given by the attorney general, Dominic Grieve, ahead of a Commons debate on military action on Monday. Even as Cameron was basking in the glory of his first major diplomatic success, in Tripoli Gaddafi’s foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, declared a ceasefire, ostensibly to “protect civilians”. But was this a ploy? Gaddafi has said he will besiege the rebel capital, Benghazi, this weekend and send in security forces to root out the “traitors” and “fanatics”. He pledged that anyone who wasn’t a traitor could walk free, but how could he tell, and who would believe him? Early this morning, Gaddafi's spokesman had laughed off the UN resolution at a jocular press conference in Tripoli, saying that a no-fly zone would not bring peace to Libya, but would simply split the country. The bizarre press conference ended with a raucous rent-a-buffoon party, with green-bedecked Gaddafi supporters leaping from chair to chair around the elegant room, like a bunch of football hooligans. A far cry, it has to be said, from the measured tones of the Commons congratulatory session.Donate to us: support independent, intelligent, in-depth Scottish journalism from just 3p a day
Related posts: