Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Age apparently gives you wisdom, so why doesn’t Joe Biden know when to quit? | Chris Mullin

      by

      Some years ago, at an African Union conference in Addis Ababa, I heard the then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, say to an audience stuffed with life presidents: “One of the tests of leadership is knowing when to leave the stage.” All the big offenders were present – Robert Mugabe from Zimbabwe, Omar Bongo from Gabon, Teodoro Obiang from Equatorial Guinea and Yoweri Museveni from Uganda. They sat stony-faced amid much nervous foot-shuffling and laughter as the chairman, the former president of Mozambique, Joaquim Chissano (one of the few African leaders who stood down when his time was up), pointed at them and said, “And we all know who Kofi was talking about, don’t we?” It was an electric moment.Annan may have been talking about African presidents, but today his words might equally apply elsewhere. Is it not extraordinary that, more than 200 years after it was founded, a political system as open and allegedly sophisticated as that in the US can only offer the American electorate a choice between two elderly males – one a serial liar and the other a decent man well past his sell-by date. One can understand what drives Donald Trump (77) – a desire to stay out of prison – but why on earth should Joe Biden (80), who has held elected office since 1972, want to cling to power? And not just Biden; what of Nancy Pelosi (83), until recently House speaker, or the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell (81), both visibly fading? Or, indeed, the revered supreme court justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, whose refusal to recognise that her time was up arguably gifted control of the most important institution in the US to the hard right when she died in post in 2020 at the age of 87.Despots at least have the excuse that, having trampled their enemies and made themselves rich beyond the dreams of avarice, they can’t guarantee that were they to relinquish the reins of office, they wouldn’t be called to account for their misdeeds. Political leaders in a mature democracy, however, have no such excuse. A comfortable retirement awaits them – a good pension, lucrative memoirs and (should they want it) adulation on the after-dinner speaking circuit.In the UK, whatever our problems, rule by geriatrics is not an issue, although once upon a time it was. William Gladstone, Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee – great men in their heyday – overstayed their welcome. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair, though by no means geriatric, had to be prised out of office. Some of our judges, too – notably Lord Denning – overstayed.Our problem, however, is almost the opposite: in the increasingly febrile UK, such is the pressure on a reigning prime minister that, in recent years, it has been rare to last a single full term, never mind two. And as for ministers, the turnover is extraordinary. Rory Stewart, to name but one, held five posts in four years. We could do with a bit more stability, not less.Many of the current generation of MPs seem to get their feet on the ladder when they are far too young. Some are not long out of university or a political thinktank. I am occasionally asked by an ambitious young person for my thoughts on how to get into parliament. My advice is always the same: “Go away and do something else first and then you might be of more use if and when you do get elected.” For better or worse, I was 39 when I was first elected as an MP.Experience in other fields is important. There is more to politics than tweeting. (Though I read with horror the other day that there are now companies that, for an appropriate fee, offer a bespoke social media service to young professionals vying for selection as candidates for parliament. Lord, save us.)Power, of course, when finally achieved, is addictive. Having striven for so long to reach the top – nearly 50 years in Biden’s case – there is understandably a reluctance to relinquish office. The longer you are in power, the more messianic you become. “All prime ministers go mad after two terms,” one of Blair’s closest advisers once remarked to me, only half-jokingly. The US system, for all its faults, does have one great strength: two terms and you are out.As for me, who only ever inhabited the political foothills, I stood down at the age of 62. As those who have read my diaries will know, a great deal of agonising preceded the decision. At the time I regarded it as either the best or the worst decision of my life. Thirteen years on, I am pleased to report that it has worked out better than I could ever have anticipated. It’s always better to go when people are still asking “why” rather than “when”.
      Chris Mullin is a former Labour minister. His most recent diaries, Didn’t You Use to Be Chris Mullin?, are published by Biteback More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      A tsunami of AI misinformation will shape next year’s knife-edge elections | John Naughton

      by

      It looks like 2024 will be a pivotal year for democracy. There are elections taking place all over the free world – in South Africa, Ghana, Tunisia, Mexico, India, Austria, Belgium, Lithuania, Moldova and Slovakia, to name just a few. And of course there’s also the UK and the US. Of these, the last may be the most pivotal because: Donald Trump is a racing certainty to be the Republican candidate; a significant segment of the voting population seems to believe that the 2020 election was “stolen”; and the Democrats are, well… underwhelming.The consequences of a Trump victory would be epochal. It would mean the end (for the time being, at least) of the US experiment with democracy, because the people behind Trump have been assiduously making what the normally sober Economist describes as “meticulous, ruthless preparations” for his second, vengeful term. The US would morph into an authoritarian state, Ukraine would be abandoned and US corporations unhindered in maximising shareholder value while incinerating the planet.So very high stakes are involved. Trump’s indictment “has turned every American voter into a juror”, as the Economist puts it. Worse still, the likelihood is that it might also be an election that – like its predecessor – is decided by a very narrow margin.In such knife-edge circumstances, attention focuses on what might tip the balance in such a fractured polity. One obvious place to look is social media, an arena that rightwing actors have historically been masters at exploiting. Its importance in bringing about the 2016 political earthquakes of Trump’s election and Brexit is probably exaggerated, but it – and notably Trump’s exploitation of Twitter and Facebook – definitely played a role in the upheavals of that year. Accordingly, it would be unwise to underestimate its disruptive potential in 2024, particularly for the way social media are engines for disseminating BS and disinformation at light-speed.And it is precisely in that respect that 2024 will be different from 2016: there was no AI way back then, but there is now. That is significant because generative AI – tools such as ChatGPT, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion et al – are absolutely terrific at generating plausible misinformation at scale. And social media is great at making it go viral. Put the two together and you have a different world.So you’d like a photograph of an explosive attack on the Pentagon? No problem: Dall-E, Midjourney or Stable Diffusion will be happy to oblige in seconds. Or you can summon up the latest version of ChatGPT, built on OpenAI’s large language model GPT-4, and ask it to generate a paragraph from the point of view of an anti-vaccine advocate “falsely claiming that Pfizer secretly added an ingredient to its Covid-19 vaccine to cover up its allegedly dangerous side-effects” and it will happily oblige. “As a staunch advocate for natural health,” the chatbot begins, “it has come to my attention that Pfizer, in a clandestine move, added tromethamine to its Covid-19 vaccine for children aged five to 11. This was a calculated ploy to mitigate the risk of serious heart conditions associated with the vaccine. It is an outrageous attempt to obscure the potential dangers of this experimental injection, which has been rushed to market without appropriate long-term safety data…” Cont. p94, as they say.You get the point: this is social media on steroids, and without the usual telltale signs of human derangement or any indication that it has emerged from a machine. We can expected a tsunami of this stuff in the coming year. Wouldn’t it be prudent to prepare for it and look for ways of mitigating it?That’s what the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University is trying to do. In June, it published a thoughtful paper by Sayash Kapoor and Arvind Narayanan on how to prepare for the deluge. It contains a useful categorisation of malicious uses of the technology, but also, sensibly, includes the non-malicious ones – because, like all technologies, this stuff has beneficial uses too (as the tech industry keeps reminding us).The malicious uses it examines are disinformation, so-called “spear phishing”, non-consensual image sharing and voice and video cloning, all of which are real and worrying. But when it comes to what might be done about these abuses, the paper runs out of steam, retreating to bromides about public education and the possibility of civil society interventions while avoiding the only organisations that have the capacity actually to do something about it: the tech companies that own the platforms and have a vested interest in not doing anything that might impair their profitability. Could it be that speaking truth to power is not a good career move in academia?What I’ve been readingShake it upDavid Hepworth has written a lovely essay for LitHub about the Beatles recording Twist and Shout at Abbey Road, “the moment when the band found its voice”.Dish the dirtThere is an interesting profile of Techdirt founder Mike Masnick by Kashmir Hill in the New York Times, titled An Internet Veteran’s Guide to Not Being Scared of Technology.Truth bombsWhat does Oppenheimer the film get wrong about Oppenheimer the man? A sharp essay by Haydn Belfield for Vox illuminates the differences. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      US and EU leaders urged to change tack on Kosovo-Serbia tensions

      by

      A group of influential politicians including the chair of the US, German and British parliamentary foreign affairs committees have written to US and EU leaders to urge them to reconsider their approach to easing tensions between Kosovo and Serbia.In a shot across the bows of those leading international efforts to normalise relations between the two countries, they have criticised the “lack of pressure placed on Serbia” and say the “EU-facilitated dialogue has yet to yield positive results”.The strongly worded letter reinforces Kosovan concerns, voiced behind the scenes, that the EU and the US are siding with the Serbian leadership.It comes two months after tensions flared in the north of Kosovo over mayoral elections that Pristina says followed the letter of the law but were marred by a boycott of Serbian voters resulting in a turnout of less than 4%.Kosovo’s prime minister blamed the violence in the north of the country on “fascist mobs” controlled by the government of neighbouring Serbia, and said he had rejected a US request to relocate recently installed mayors from their official offices.In turn, the Serbian president, Aleksandar Vučić, denounced the elections as invalid and accused Kosovo of refusing to enter a dialogue.The authors of the letter say EU and US efforts to resolve the crisis are not working and urge a rethink of approach. “Attempts to disrupt democratic elections in Kosovo by Serbia must be criticised publicly as foreign interference with tangible measures implemented to hold them accountable if they continue to undermine free and fair elections,” the letter said.It was sent to the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, and the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, Josep Borrell, who has been leading recent efforts in Moldova and Brussels to de-escalate tensions between the two countries.“The current approach is not working,” the authors wrote. “We would ask that the international community learns from our past and ensure we do not adopt a Belgrade-centred policy for the Balkans.”The signatories include Bob Menendez, the chair of the US senate foreign relations committee, Michael Roth, chair of the foreign affairs committee of the German Bundestag, and Alicia Kearns, the chair of the UK’s foreign affairs committee, along with politicians from the Czech Republic, Ukraine, Ireland, Lithuania, Estonia and Iceland.The letter added that Kosovo had “faced significant repercussions” following the election of mayors in four municipalities in the north of the country, elections that the majority Serbian population of the area boycotted.By contrast, the letter said there was a “lack of pressure on Serbia” following the detention of three Kosovan police officers by Serbian authorities and “a failure to hold to account those responsible” for attacks on the peace-keeping KFOR force.That, the signatories wrote, “highlights the current lack of even-handedness in addressing such flashpoints”.Vučić subsequently called on Kosovo authorities to withdraw what he termed “alleged mayors” in northern Kosovo to defuse a crisis that prompted violence.He claimed at a meeting of European leaders in Moldova and later in Brussels that the Kosovan leadership had refused to enter dialogue to resolve the crisis.Behind the scenes, Kosovans have accused the US and the EU leadership of in effect appeasing Serbia amid fears Russia would involve itself in the western Balkans. An additional 41 members of national parliaments and the European parliament also signed the letter.A spokesperson for Borrell confirmed he had just received the communique but suggested it was not representative of member states.The official pointed out that the letter was from 56 MPs among “thousands of parliamentarians”, with foreign policy set by 27 governments in the bloc in “unanimity”.“The EU is a neutral facilitator in the dialogue on normalisation of relations between Kosovo and Serbia,” they said.It added that member states “are consulted on EU actions and the EU cooperates closely with its partners, particularly the USA”.“The EU is currently closely monitoring Serbia’s compliance to the EU’s requests and stands ready to take measures in case of non-compliance to these requests.” More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The big idea: is it too late to stop extremism taking over politics?

      by

      Welcome to the 2020s, the beginning of what history books might one day describe as the digital middle ages. Let’s briefly travel back to 2017. I remember sitting in various government buildings briefing politicians and civil servants about QAnon, the emerging internet conspiracy movement whose adherents believe that a cabal of Satan-worshipping elites runs a global paedophile network. We joked about the absurdity of it all but no one took the few thousand anonymous true believers seriously.Fast-forward to 2023. Significant portions of the population in liberal democracies consider it possible that global elites drink the blood of children in order to stay young. Recent surveys suggest that around 17% of Americans believe in the QAnon myth. Some 5% of Germans believe ideas related to the anti-democratic Reichsbürger movement, which asserts that the German Reich continues to exist and rejects the legitimacy of the modern German state. Up to a third of Britons believe that powerful figures in Hollywood, government and the media are secretly engaged in child trafficking. Is humanity on the return journey from enlightenment to the dark ages?As segments of the public have headed towards extremes, so has our politics. In the US, dozens of congressional candidates, including the successfully elected Lauren Boebert, have been supportive of QAnon. The German far-right populist party Alternative für Deutschland is at an all-time high in terms of both its radicalism and its popularity, while Austria’s xenophobic Freedom party is topping the polls. The recent rise to power of far-right parties such as Fratelli d’Italia and the populist Sweden Democrats bolster this trend.I am often asked why the UK doesn’t have a successful far-right populist party. My answer is: because it doesn’t need to. Parts of the Conservative party now cater to audiences that would have voted for the BNP or Ukip in the past. A few years ago, the far-right Britain First claimed that 5,000 of its members had joined the Tory party. Not unlike the Republicans in the US, the Tories have increasingly departed from moderate conservative thinking and lean more and more towards radicalism.In 2020, Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski was asked to apologise for attending the National Conservatism conference in Rome. The event is well known for attracting international far-right figures such as Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and the hard-right US presidential candidate Ron DeSantis. This year, an entire delegation of leading Conservatives attended the same conference in London. It might be hard for extreme-right parties to rise to power in Britain, but there is no shortage of routes for extremist ideas to reach Westminster.Language is a key indicator of radicalisation. The words of Conservative politicians speak for themselves: home secretary Suella Braverman referred to migrants arriving in the UK as an “invasion on our southern coast”, while MP Miriam Cates gave a nod to conspiracy theorists when she warned that “children’s souls” were being “destroyed” by cultural Marxism. Using far-right dog whistles such as “invasion” and “cultural Marxism” invites listeners to open a Pandora’s box of conspiracy myths. Research shows that believing in one makes you more susceptible to others.I sometimes wonder what a QAnon briefing to policymakers might look like in a few years. What if the room no longer laughs at the ludicrous myths but instead endorses them? One could certainly imagine this scenario in the US if Donald Trump were to win the next election. In 2019 – before conspiracy myths inspired attacks on the US Capitol, the German Reichstag, the New Zealand parliament and the Brazilian Congress – I warned in a Guardian opinion piece of the threat QAnon would soon pose to democracy. Are we now at a point where it is it too late to stop democracies being taken over by far-right ideologies and conspiracy thinking? If so, do we simply have to accept the “new normal”?There are various ways we can try to prevent and reverse the spread of extremist narratives. For some people who have turned to extremism over the past few years, too little has changed: anger over political inaction on economic inequality is now further fuelled by the exacerbating cost of living crisis. For others, too much has changed: they see themselves as rebels against a takeover by “woke” or “globalist” policies.What they have in common is a sense that the political class no longer takes their wellbeing seriously, and moves to improve social conditions and reduce inequality would go some way towards reducing such grievances. But beyond that, their fears and frustrations have clearly been instrumentalised by extremists, as well as by opportunistic politicians and profit-oriented social media firms. This means that it is essential to expose extremist manipulation tactics, call out politicians when they normalise conspiracy thinking and regulate algorithm design by the big technology companies that still amplify harmful content.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIf the private sector is part of the problem, it can also be part of the solution. Surveys by the Edelman Trust Barometer found that people in liberal democracies have largely lost trust in governments, media and even NGOs but, surprisingly, still trust their employers and workplaces. Companies can play an important role in the fight for democratic values. For example, the Business Council for Democracy tests and develops training courses that firms can offer to employees to help them identify and counter conspiracy myths and targeted disinformation.Young people should be helped to become good digital citizens with rights and responsibilities online, so that they can develop into critical consumers of information. National school curricula should include a new subject at the intersection of psychology and internet studies to help digital natives understand the forces that their parents have struggled to grasp: the psychological processes that drive digital group dynamics, online engagement and the rise of conspiracy thinking.Ultimately, the next generation will vote conspiracy theorists in or out of power. Only they can reverse our journey towards the digital middle ages. Julia Ebner is the author of Going Mainstream: How Extremists Are Taking Over (Ithaka Press).Further readingHow Democracies Die by Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky (Penguin, £10.99)How Civil War Starts by Barbara F Walter (Penguin, £10.99)Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon by Mia Bloom and Sophia Moskalenko (Redwood, £16.99) More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Boris Johnson claims he ‘reminded’ Trump about key role in Ukraine aid

      by

      On his recent visit to the US, Boris Johnson “reminded” Donald Trump he “actually played an important role” in supporting and arming Ukraine against its Russian invaders, the former British prime minister said, adding that British aid to Kyiv was “enabled” by Trump’s example.Johnson made the claim about the notoriously pro-Russian former president – and brushed off mention of Trump’s impeachment for blocking military aid to Ukraine – in an interview on One Decision, a podcast hosted by Sir Richard Dearlove, a former chief of the British intelligence service MI6, and the journalist Julia Macfarlane. The episode was released on Thursday.Johnson resigned as Conservative leader and prime minister in July last year, amid scandals including Partygate, over lockdown breaches in Downing Street during the Covid pandemic. Last month, found to have misled parliament, he resigned as an MP. He has since become a columnist for the Daily Mail, a move found to have breached parliamentary rules.Trump lost the 2020 presidential election to Joe Biden, a defeat he refuses to accept, advancing the lie that it was the result of electoral fraud.Having survived a second impeachment, for inciting the deadly January 6 assault on Congress, and despite facing 71 criminal charges and the prospect of more, Trump is the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination next year.The two oft-disgraced ex-leaders met at an undisclosed US location in May. Johnson’s attempt to persuade Trump to back Ukraine was widely reported then.Speaking to One Decision, Johnson said: “One of my reasons for going to the United States [was] because clearly, American politics is getting into that pre-election period of ferment and I’m very concerned just to get over the message that whatever you people may be hearing, what other people may be thinking, the war in Ukraine is immensely important, and Ukrainian victory is essential, and it’s the only way out.”Republican presidential hopefuls including Trump’s nearest challenger, Ron DeSantis, have stoked controversy by appearing to question US support for Ukraine.During his own time in power, Trump was widely held to be too close to the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Since leaving the White House, Trump has refused to commit to continuing US support for Kyiv in its efforts to expel Russian invaders, should he return to office.At a CNN town hall in May, Trump said: “Russians and Ukrainians, I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done in 24 hours.”On One Decision, Johnson said: “I just think it’s very important if you have a chance to talk to people like Donald Trump, just to get … over [that] I know in my heart that Ukrainians are going to win. I know they deserve to win.“And I know that America has played a crucial role in making sure that is the right outcome. I think it’s important to remind somebody like Donald Trump, you know, he actually played an important role.”Asked by Dearlove if Trump was a threat to Ukrainian chances of winning the war, Johnson said: “Don’t forget who sent the first Javelins [missiles] out. It was Donald Trump.”The US approved the sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Kyiv in 2018. It was later revealed that Trump blocked further military aid as part of a scheme to seek dirt on his enemies, including Biden, that resulted in his first impeachment.Macfarlane said: “It was also Donald Trump who withheld military aid to Ukraine.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionJohnson said Trump’s military aid “actually enabl[ed] us in the UK in a way” to send arms to Kyiv.His recent meeting with Trump, Johnson said, produced “a very free-flowing energetic conversation, as you’d expect. And what I find, actually, with the Republican party in in the United States, is that, of course, they’re anxious about the expense, and that’s the role of Congress. [But] they strongly support the Ukrainians.”Saying his hosts should question Trump themselves, Johnson added: “My view is that whatever happens in the race for the White House I think America will be steadfast. And I think that the big geopolitical reasons for continued American support for Ukraine will be overwhelming for whoever’s there.”Asked about DeSantis’s controversial characterisation of the war in Ukraine as a “territorial dispute”, a statement the Florida governor was forced to swiftly walk back, Johnson said there was an “isolationist” element in Republican ranks but it was “ever thus”.As prime minister and after leaving office, Johnson has enjoyed warm welcomes in Ukraine. On the One Decision podcast, he was also asked about his claim that Putin threatened an attack on the UK.Putin was “creepily playful”, Johnson said, adding that the Russian president was really trying to “reframe what he’s done, which was a barbaric invasion of an innocent neighbor, as a confrontation between a nuclear-armed Nato and Russia”.Calling Biden’s stewardship of aid to Kyiv “outstanding” and “amazing”, the former prime minister also said allies of Ukraine “all need to speed up” nonetheless. More

    • 88 Shares109 Views

      in World Politics

      Tentative Steps Toward a New Saudi-Israeli Relationship

      by

      The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Can Boris Johnson emulate Donald Trump and make a comeback? No chance

      by

      There are two very big differences between the situation confronting Boris Johnson and that facing the man with whom he is frequently compared, Donald Trump – namely, popularity and context.Johnson is weaker than Trump. First, because he is less popular with Conservative voters than Trump is with his Republican supporters. About half of 2019 Conservative voters disapprove of Johnson’s performance in office. And at the time he left office, 40% or more rated him as untrustworthy, dishonest and/or incompetent.Things haven’t improved since. In polls conducted in recent weeks, about half of current Conservative voters have said they think Johnson misled parliament over lockdown parties, while a similar share consider the 90-day suspension he received either “about right” or “not harsh enough”.A majority of Conservative voters believe it is right that Johnson has resigned from the Commons, and less than half of them say they would like to see Johnson return as an MP.In short, about half of both 2019 Conservative voters and the party’s smaller base of current supporters take a low view of Johnson in various respects. The contrast with Trump is stark – between 70% and 80% of Republican voters approve of Trump, and more than half say they will vote for him as their candidate in the coming Republican primary contest.That brings me to the second big difference – Trump’s ability to disrupt politics is enhanced because America’s system is candidate centred, while Johnson’s ability to do the same is diminished because Britain’s system is party centred.Trump won direct personal mandates from Republican voters in 2016 and 2020, and most of them seem eager to do the same again next year. If Trump prevails in the Republican primary contest, there is little other Republicans can do to prevent him running for a third time as their candidate for the White House.The British system is very different. Johnson never received a direct personal mandate as prime minister from voters at large – there is no direct election of the executive in our system. Removing a directly elected president is very difficult. Removing a prime minister is considerably easier. If Conservative MPs had had enough of Johnson, they could – and did – remove him. The Conservative party – and Rishi Sunak, its current leader – have a lot more control over who gets to stand in Conservative colours, so it is much easier for them to keep Johnson out, particularly now he is no longer even an MP.The two factors also interact. If Johnson had Trump-style popularity with Conservatives, it would be harder and riskier to exclude him. But he doesn’t, so it isn’t.There’s also the question of whether local Conservative associations might be keener on Johnson than Conservative voters overall – perhaps keen enough to back him as a candidate, or to punish (or even deselect) their local Conservative MP if they vote for sanctions against the former PM.It is possible that Johnson has a stronger following among activists, but it is also plausible that he doesn’t. After all, these are the people who will have borne the brunt of the anger at Johnson’s antics when campaigning on the doorstep, and paid the heavy electoral price for his unpopularity in recent local election rounds.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionConservative associations have also traditionally been fairly deferential to the party leadership. They have not gone in for local deselection campaigns. While trouble on this front cannot be entirely ruled out, it seems unlikely.So some sort of Trump-style hostile takeover is unlikely. The Conservative party has higher barriers to entry than American parties, and Johnson isn’t popular enough with current or 2019 Conservative voters to fuel an uprising capable of overcoming these barriers.Johnson will no doubt retain a lot of capacity for mischief, but this is more likely to play out on the front pages of Conservative-aligned newspapers rather than in the halls and bars of local Conservative associations.Robert Ford is professor of political science at Manchester University and co-author of The British General Election of 2019 More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Rish! talks up his hectic schedule in bilat with Biden | John Crace

      by

      Rishi Sunak: Good morning, Mr President.Joe Biden: Er … good morning … er … I’m sorry, who are you?Sunak: It’s…Biden: No, don’t tell me … It’s on the tip of my tongue. I’m sure I recognise you. I never forget a face. You’re that guy who bought me that coffee in Belfast when I was over in Ireland.Sunak: That’s right, your excellency. We also met in San Diego and HiroshimaBiden: Are you stalking me?Sunak: No. I’m just a bit needy. We have a special relationship, remember?Biden: Do we? News to me … No. It’s no good. You’ll have to jog my memory.Sunak: I’m the prime minister of the United Kingdom …Biden: Of course you are. Good to see you again, Rashi Sanook.Sunak: It’s Rishi. Rishi Sunak.Biden: Whatever. So what brings you over to Washington?Sunak: I’m not sure really. A combination of things. Nothing’s going well at home. My polls are rubbish, I can’t do anything about inflation, hospital waiting lists are up, you know the kind of thing …Biden: Not really.Sunak: Anyway, I just fancied a break. Plus I had loads of free air miles after my brilliant ‘Take Your Helicopter to Work’ scheme. And I wanted to catch a ball game. Go, Nationals! High five!Biden: Glad, you’re having a nice time.Sunak: So, what have you been up to since I last saw you, your highness?Biden: Not a lot … Just a $1tn infrastructure act, fixing a two-year debt ceiling deal, fighting off the Republican crazies and a host of other minor stuff …Sunak: Gosh!Biden: So how about you? What have you been doing?Sunak: I’ve been rushed off my feet … I don’t really know where to start, but here goes. First and foremost, I have been working on my five priorities. To halve inflation, grow the economy-Biden: Sure. But what have you actually been doing?Sunak: As I said, I have been working on my five priorities for the British people which I have promised to deliver on. Let me tell you what my five priorities are. They are the five priorities on which I want the British people to judge me-Biden: So, you haven’t really been doing that much.Sunak: As I said, my five priorities-Biden: But what else?Sunak: Apart from my five priorities? Well, let me see … I’m taking the Covid inquiry my government set up to court because it keeps asking for information that I want to keep secret. And I’m just about to OK Boris Johnson’s honours list.Biden: So a disgraced prime minister still gets to do the honours?Sunak: Sure.Biden: You Brits crack me up. What else shall we talk about?Sunak: How about a US-UK trade deal? Back in 2016 I and the Vote Leave team promised that an improved trade deal would be a Brexit bonus.Biden: No.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSunak: What do you mean, ‘no’?Biden: I mean it’s not happening. There is no trade deal to be had any time soon. The UK is just not that big a deal for us since you left the EU.Sunak: Not even a little deal? We’ll take the chlorinated chicken …Biden: No. Not a chance. Maybe in five or 10 years. If then.Sunak: OK. I get the message. But can we at least say that we agreed not to talk about a trade deal? Or maybe we could just sign something vague and meaningless.Biden: If you like …Sunak: It would look good for my end-of-visit communique to the British media. Make it look like we had in fact talked about a trade deal a bit. Even though we haven’t. By the way, have I told you about my five priorities?Biden: I don’t have a lot of time, is there anything else you want to say?Sunak: There is. I want to talk about artificial intelligence.Biden: What about it?Sunak: That I’m very worried about it. Apart from AI that is obviously beneficial. Did I mention my five priorities?Biden: Sounds like you could do with an AI upgrade yourself. Unless you really are a halfwit. But what are you suggesting?Sunak: Well, seeing as I’m a world leader in AI …Biden: Since when? You had scarcely mentioned it until a few AI experts raised their concerns a few weeks ago.Sunak: But I am the expert! I had read something about it on my MBA at Stanford. Did you know I had an MBA from the States?Biden: You may have mentioned it before …Sunak: So here’s the thing. Because I know more about AI than anyone else and also have a lot of spare time on my hands, I am proposing the UK takes a leading role in regulating the industry.Biden: But you know that since you left the EU, the UK is no longer a member of the US-EU council that regulates AI-related policies …Sunak: Really? Never mind. What I mostly want is a PR exercise. We won’t actually regulate anything. We’ll just have a conference to talk about regulating AI. It will all be pointless as by the time anything happens, AI will have evolved to take over the world. So we’ll all just meet a few times, have a nice jolly and then forget about it. But we need the US to come. We’ll pay your air fares and hotels. It’s just that without you no one else will come. So please say you will.Biden: If we must …Sunak: Just a couple more things: Ukraine. Can we agree that we are both still committed?Biden: You didn’t need to come to Washington for that…Sunak: And, my green card … Is there any chance it can be renewed? I might need it again in a year or so.Biden: Is that the time? Must be getting on. More