UK news

Subterms

    Latest story

    213 Shares199 Views

    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

    More stories

    • 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

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Wednesday briefing: The big one – Trump indicted for January 6

      by

      Good morning.Donald Trump has been indicted for “conspiring to defraud the United States” and other alleged crimes connected to his efforts to overturn the 2020 US election result.The news, which broke late last night UK time, marks the first time Trump has faced criminal charges over his actions after his defeat by Joe Biden, and throws the run-up to next year’s presidential election into even greater turmoil.Trump is bidding to regain the White House in 2024; he leads in polling for the Republican presidential nomination by a substantial majority. He called the case “ridiculous”.Our newsletter this morning rounds up the latest developments on an extraordinary story.First, the other news headlines.Five big stories
      UK news | The family of Captain Tom Moore have objected to an enforcement notice ordering them to pull down an unauthorised spa pool block at the home of the late charity fundraiser.
      Conservatives | Jeremy Hunt oversaw the signing of a low-tax treaty with San Marino that was championed by a leading Tory donor, who with his companies has given more than £700,000 to the party and £30,000 to the chancellor. Maurizio Bragagni, a prominent businessman and diplomat for San Marino, was present in No 11 Downing Street when a “double taxation” treaty was signed in May.
      AI | UK intelligence agencies are lobbying the government to weaken surveillance laws, which they argue place a “burdensome” limit on their ability to train artificial intelligence models with large amounts of personal data.
      Rights | Anti-protest laws and culture wars perpetrated by the government are among the issues highlighted as “urgent and alarming” by two thinktanks that argue the threat to Britain’s democratic spaces is growing, with charities and civil society groups come under “political attack” by ministers.
      Science | Adults’ penchant for the landscapes of Vincent van Gogh is mirrored in babies, researchers say. Infants and adults were shown a selection of 10 of Van Gogh’s landscapes among 40 possible images. The infants tended to gaze longer at artworks that adult participants rated higher for pleasantness. Van Gogh’s Green Corn Stalks had the highest shared preference.
      In depth: ‘Defendant spread lies that he had actually won’Former president Donald Trump has been summoned to appear in a Washington court to answer charges linked to his bid to overturn the 2020 US presidential election.The development, announced by special counsel Jack Smith is not wholly a surprise: a congressional panel created to investigate the January 6 insurrection recommended criminal charges last December. The US Justice Department has been investigating this and further evidence since.But that does not make this news any less astonishing. A former president, who otherwise may stand a very good chance of being re-elected, has been charged with, among other things, conspiring to defraud the country he wants to lead. It is the first time a US president has faced charges for trying to overturn an election.The indictmentTrump has been indicted on four charges:* Conspiracy to defraud the United States* Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding* Obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding* Conspiracy against rightsYou can read the full indictment on the US courts website – but here is a flavour: “The Defendant lost the 2020 presidential election,” the 45-page document states. “Despite having lost the defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies … that he had actually won.”It alleges that Trump repeated false claims of election fraud, despite repeated warnings from multiple people in his circle, including senior leaders in the justice department and senior attorneys who had been appointed by Trump, and the former vice-president Mike Pence, who told him “he had seen no evidence of outcome-determinative fraud”.As our US team report today, the indictment describes a conspiracy which, at its core, involves Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly trying to dupe Pence into falsely suggesting the outcome of the 2020 election had been in doubt.To do so, prosecutors say Trump tried to use the Justice Department to open “sham election fraud investigations” and repeatedly tried to co-opt Pence into rejecting electoral college votes for Joe Biden in a bid to stop his election win being certified.When that failed, the indictment says, Trump tried to block the certification and exploited the January 6 Capitol attack by trying to push false claims of election fraud and to convince members of Congress to continue to delay the certification.Six other co-conspirators are listed but not named, though the indictment says they are four attorneys, a justice department official and a political consultant.They have been tentatively identified, however, and they are thought to include Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who was Trump’s attorney in the wake of his presidential defeat.The six have not been charged at this time, but could be in future.The background, in briefThe indictment stems from Trump’s refusal, in the weeks and months after his defeat by Joe Biden in November 2020, to accept he had lost, and from the violent attempt by a group of Trump’s supporters on 6 January 2021 to disrupt the congressional certification of Biden’s victory.That event caused the deaths of seven people, a bipartisan Senate report found, and has already resulted in more than 1,000 arrests.Trump is also facing other serious legal charges in New York and Florida over an alleged hush-money scheme during the 2016 election and his alleged mishandling of classified documents. Separately, he was found liable in May for sexual abuse and defamation against the writer E Jean Carroll – he has appealed. And he could face other charges in Georgia over alleged election code violations.What does Trump say?The former president hit back on Truth Social: “Why didn’t they bring this ridiculous case 2.5 years ago? They wanted it right in the middle of my campaign, that’s why!”The Trump campaign earlier issued a statement calling the indictments “nothing more than the latest corrupt chapter in the continued pathetic attempt by the Biden Crime Family and their weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 Presidential election, in which President Trump is the undisputed frontrunner”.What do others say?There have been a range of responses from Trump’s Republican rivals and supporters.Pence, who is also running in 2024, said: “Today’s indictment serves as an important reminder: anyone who puts himself over the constitution should never be president of the United States.” Florida governor Ron DeSantis said he hadn’t read the indictment, but would enact reforms: “Washington DC is a ‘swamp’ and it is unfair to have to stand trial before a jury that is reflective of the swamp mentality,” he tweeted.Others have been more vocal. Ohio congressman Jim Jordan tweeted: “When you drain The Swamp, The Swamp fights back. President Trump did nothing wrong!”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionChuck Schumer, the (Democrat) Senate majority leader, and Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, issued a joint statement saying that the violence of 6 January 2021 “was the culmination of a months-long criminal plot led by the former president to defy democracy and overturn the will of the American people”.There was no immediate comment from President Joe Biden, who is on holiday in Delaware; he went to the cinema with his wife, Jill, to watch Oppenheimer shortly after the indictment was announced.What happens next?The former president has been summoned to appear before a federal magistrate judge in Washington DC on Thursday.Jack Smith, the special counsel, said he would seek a “speedy trial”, and stressed that the former president was entitled to a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.Smith described the January 6 insurrection as “an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy” that was “fuelled by lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing the bedrock function of the US government admissions process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election”.If convicted on all counts, Trump could, in theory, spend decades in prison, but federal penalties are rarely as high as the maximum possible sentence.Trump’s latest indictments would not bar him from standing for office – and nor would a conviction. At any other time it would be inconceivable to imagine a candidate facing multiple indictments to win the Republican nomination, but Trump’s political career has never conformed to expectations.What else we’ve been reading
      I have been enjoying the second season of the Sex and the City reboot, And Just Like That …, but Louis Staples in Harper’s Bazaar hits the nail on the head on what is missing from the show: its inner cynic. Self-conscious and concerned with the life of Manhattan’s elite, the show’s lack of healthy scepticism leaves it feeling a little hollow, writes Staples. Nimo
      We all know the things that irritate us when we eat out – but what do chefs find most annoying about diners? Tony Naylor reports. (A tip: standing on your chair to take food pics isn’t always popular.) Esther
      After running a successful experiment last year, Jo Hunter has decided to commit to taking every August off, along with the rest of her staff. She explains why her company runs on an 11-month year and how transformative it has been for their business and employees. Nimo
      I loved this brief story from novelist Colin Walsh’s school days, about the moment one of his teachers broke off from the exam script to tell “a bunch of lads, all acne and adrenaline” about the unimaginable ways their awareness of life was about to expand. Esther
      During the London press preview screening of Barbie, influencers and writers alike were encouraged to share their positive feelings about the film on Twitter – but embargos for full reviews remained in place for two more days. Manuela Lazić left feeling censored. She asks what the role for film criticism is when studios can rely on influencers for glowing reviews. Nimo
      SportFootball | Inspired by two goals and three assists from Lauren James, England’s Lionesses topped Group D after a sensational 6-1 victory against China in their final Women’s World Cup group game. Denmark took down Haiti 2-0 after captain Pernille Harder converted a first-half penalty to also qualify from the group, while the Netherlands thrashed Vietnam 7-0 England in the knockout stage and the USA squeezed into the next round after drawing 0-0 with Portugal.Netball | England clinched their place in the World Cup semi-finals with a match to spare after defeating Fiji 89-28 in a late-night game in Cape Town.Football | Chelsea have signed the midfielder Lesley Ugochukwu from Rennes for €27m (£23.2m) and are deciding whether to explore an offer to take Dusan Vlahovic from Juventus as part of a swap deal involving Romelu Lukaku. Jürgen Klopp has laughed off suggestions Liverpool are in the running to put together a loan deal for the France striker Kylian Mbappé who has rejected the chance to hold talks with the Saudi Arabian club Al-Hilal after Paris Saint-Germain accepted a world-record £259m bid and Anfield has been touted as a possible destination.The front pages“Asylum seeker barge may be ‘deathtrap’, firefighters warn” is on the front of the Guardian today, and there’s another story there on medical research, about which the Times says “AI can help medics spot more breast cancer cases”. “Cancer ‘holy grail’” says the Metro but it’s a different breakthrough – a pill that has the potential to kill tumours. The Daily Express has “Biggest house price fall in 14 years … but rise on way” while the i reports “Recession fears grow as interest rates set to rise until Christmas”. “We’re shaping Labour policy, boasts eco-mob” – that’s the Daily Mail, about you guessed it, Just Stop Oil. Top story in the Financial Times is “Business ‘breathes sigh of relief’ after post-Brexit goods safety mark ditched”. The Daily Telegraph tells us: “First-time criminals to avoid court”. “Anton: My dad stabbed me” reports the Daily Mirror under the strapline “Strictly judge’s agony”.Today in FocusLife in the UK for one of China’s most wantedHong Kong activist Finn Lau has vowed to continue his fight for democracy despite the Chinese bounty on his head.Cartoon of the day | Steve BellThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badThe longlist for the Booker prize, the UK’s most prestigious literary award, has been released and, writes Ella Creamer, it features an “original and thrilling” number of diverse novelists. For the first time, novels by Irish writers comprise one-third of the list, making Ireland the country that has produced the most nominees relative to population size. The judges have also chosen smaller debuts instead of the expected major novels of the year, with seven of the titles coming from independent publishers. Ayọ̀bámi Adébáyọ is the fifth Nigerian author to be nominated for the Booker, for her novel A Spell of Good Things, which was described by judges as a “powerful, staggering read” in its “examination of class and desire in modern-day Nigeria”. The list has been seen as a breath of fresh air, with its focus on lesser-known writers. Esi Edugyan, the chair of the panel which read 163 books in across seven months, said the longlist is defined by “the irreverence of new voices, by the iconoclasm of established ones”, and the novels are “small revolutions, each seeking to energise and awaken the language”.Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every SundayBored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.
      Quick crossword
      Cryptic crossword
      Wordiply 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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      We bailed out the banks but we’re not prepared to bail out the planet

      by

      Like many other politicians, Joe Biden talks a good game about the need to tackle global heating. Climate change is an “existential threat”, the US president said last week, as America sizzled amid record-breaking temperatures.Biden had to do something in response to what António Guterres, the UN secretary general, described as the boiling of the planet. The White House announced a series of measures – such as improved access to drinking water and planting more trees – in response to what has been the hottest month on record.To Biden’s critics, this is fiddling while Rome burns. They say he should be declaring a climate emergency, which would allow him to block new fossil fuel projects without congressional approval. As it is, Biden has showed a marked reluctance to take this step. There are clearly limits to what the US government is prepared to do to counter this “existential threat”.It is a similar picture in the UK, where the Conservative party’s surprise victory in the Uxbridge and South Ruislip byelection was in large part due to the plans by London’s Labour mayor, Sadiq Khan, to expand the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez) to the capital’s outer boroughs.Put simply, the Ulez seeks to improve London’s air quality by placing a charge on the use of older petrol and diesel vehicles, which tend to be not just the most polluting but also the most likely to be owned by poorer households already struggling with Britain’s cost of living crisis.The byelection defeat clearly rattled the Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer. “We are doing something very wrong if policies put forward by the Labour party end up on each and every Tory leaflet,” he said. “We’ve got to face up to that and learn the lessons.”In their different ways, recent events in the US and the UK show just how difficult it will be to put the global economy on a saner and more sustainable course.Problem number one is that politicians struggle to think beyond the next election. Biden is running for re-election next year, and Starmer wants to end a run of four successive defeats for Labour. The temptation to put off tough decisions to another day is powerful.That’s because of problem number two: the lack of consensus about what needs to be done and over what time period change needs to happen. What’s needed is for Democrats and Republicans in the US and Labour and the Conservatives in the UK to announce that they are jointly signed up to a course of action that will extend well beyond one presidential or parliamentary term. The failure to forge a bi-partisan approach provides an incentive for parties to look for short-term political gain, even when doing so risks longer-term harm.There’s a reason for that, namely that some of the policies required have upfront costs that make them unpopular for those that find them hard to bear. Telling a key worker who can only afford an ageing diesel car that they will have to pay £12.50 a day to drive to their job is never going to be easy, especially in a period when living standards are being squeezed. There is no getting away from the fact that the Ulez expansion is a regressive tax and, as Khan has found, changes that make hard-up people even worse off breed anger, and that anger will inevitably find a political outlet.So problem number three is that there are a lot of poor people in the UK and the US. And problem number four is that not nearly enough is being done to help these people make the green transition. For that to happen, there would need not just to be a recognition of the link between global heating and grotesque levels of inequality, but a willingness to do something about it.In the developed west, this means using the financial firepower of the state to reduce the number of losers from the green transition. In developing countries, it means transfers of both money and technical knowhow, so that countries that need growth as part of their anti-poverty programmes minimise the use of fossil fuels. Meeting the “existential” threat that Biden talks about requires action not just in the UK or the US but in China, India and other emerging countries, too. Climate action on a global scale will be costly.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThat brings us to problem number five. The change from one economic paradigm to another – the creative destruction that the political economist Joseph Schumpeter talked about – is hard because it requires those who have invested in existing industries to recognise that the game is up. This transition can be prolonged if those wedded to the status quo have invested huge sums and wield enormous power, as is the case with the fossil fuel industry.The solution to these problems lies ultimately in the hands of politicians such as Biden, because they alone have the power to remove barriers to change.As the rapid responses to the global financial crisis of 2007-09 and the Covid pandemic proved, governments can act speedily, collectively and decisively if the crisis is deemed big enough. When the banks were facing their existential crisis in 2008, money was created to bail them out and prevent a second Great Depression. In 2020, economies were effectively put on a war footing.Should the same approach be adopted in the fight against climate change? Yes. Is there any sign of this happening? Not on the scale required. Effectively, this is like the 1930s, when there was resistance to meeting the threat of fascism. Then, as now, what was needed was rapid rearmament. Then, as now, what we’re getting is a failure to do what needs to be done. 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

    • 225 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      After the destruction of the Kakhovka dam, another threat lies on Ukraine’s horizon: Donald Trump | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      The war for Ukraine gets darker and more terrifying, and now a new front has opened up many miles away – in a US Republican party whose biggest players are itching to abandon Ukraine to its fate.Proof of the conflict’s deepening horror came this week, with the destruction on Tuesday of the Kakhovka dam in Russian-controlled Ukraine, releasing a body of water so massive it’s best imagined not as a reservoir but as a great lake. The result has been the flooding of a vast swath of terrain, forcing thousands to abandon their homes and flee for their lives. But the menaces unleashed by this act go further than the immediate and devastating effect on the people who live close by.For one thing, this calamity has hit a region of rich and fertile farmland, the same soil that long made Ukraine a breadbasket for the world: the fifth-largest exporter of wheat on the planet, the food source on which much of Africa and the Middle East has relied. Now there are warnings that the fields of southern Ukraine could “turn into deserts” by next year, because the water held back by the dam and needed to irrigate those fields is draining away. That will have an impact on food supplies and food prices, with an effect in turn on inflation and the global economy.Not that the international impact can be measured in dollars and cents alone. Volodymyr Zelenskiy has warned that contaminated floodwaters now carry with them sewage, oil, chemicals and even anthrax from animal burial sites. That toxic material will, said the Ukrainian president, poison rivers and, before long, the water basin of the Black Sea. “So it’s not happening somewhere else. It is all interrelated in the world.”Meanwhile, the Red Cross has sounded an alarm of its own: the bursting of the dam does grievous damage to its ongoing effort to locate and clear landmines in the area. “We knew where the hazards were,” the organisation lamented. “Now we don’t know. All we know is that they are somewhere downstream.” Dislodged by the racing waters, those devices are now floating mines. And that’s before you reckon with the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the biggest in Europe, which relies on water from the now-draining reservoir for the essential process of cooling.Small wonder that Zelenskiy speaks of “an environmental bomb of mass destruction,” while others now mention Kakhovka in the same breath as Chornobyl. Except few believe this was an accident.Naturally, Moscow insists that this was not a Russian act: it says the Ukrainians did this to themselves. Still, and even though investigations are ongoing, it’s worth heeding the advice of the specialist in Ukrainian history Timothy Snyder, and remembering the fundamentals of detective work. “Russia had the means,” Snyder notes, in that Russia was in control of the relevant part of the dam when it appeared to explode. Russia had the motive, in that it fears a Ukrainian counteroffensive aimed at taking back territory – and flooded ground is ground over which tanks cannot advance.And there is the pattern of behaviour, the record of past crimes. Russia has scarcely restrained itself from targeting Ukraine’s civil infrastructure over the last 15 months: Kakhovka would just be the latest and most wanton example. Indeed, the destruction of dams to trigger mass flooding is no more than Russia’s ultra-nationalist talking heads and TV pundit class have been demanding for a while. This week one such voice suggested Moscow give the Kyiv dam the Kakhovka treatment and that it “raze the city to the ground”. As if weighing up the moral implications, he asked, “Why should we be holier than the pope?”The official denials should not be taken too seriously, given the Kremlin’s history of disinformation and outright lies. Better to judge Russia by its deeds than its words. So what did Russia do to help those made desperate by the floods? The answer was swift and it came from Russian artillery units, seemingly firing on Ukrainian rescue workers and evacuees as they tried to flee to safety. It’s a strategy familiar from Moscow’s war in Syria: pile pain upon pain, misery upon misery.Supporters of Ukraine say that this is a sign of Russian weakness, that it is resorting to barbaric methods because it knows that, in key respects, Ukraine has the upper hand – not least because it enjoys the support of a united west. That is true, for now. But there is a threat from within the alliance’s most powerful member.Freshly indicted though he is, Donald Trump remains the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president. And Trump is a well-documented friend of Vladimir Putin and a sceptic on the merits of continued US support for Kyiv. When asked on CNN last month, the former president couldn’t say who he wants to prevail in the contest between Russia and Ukraine, between invader and invaded. Nor would he commit to supplying aid to Kyiv: “We don’t have ammunition for ourselves, we’re giving away so much.” Asked about war crimes charges against Putin – centred on the alleged mass abduction of Ukrainian children and their transfer across the border to be “re-educated” as Russians – Trump again refused to condemn the “smart guy” in the Kremlin.Because Trump has remade the Republican party in his own image, this is not a danger confined to him alone. His nearest current rival, the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, echoed Moscow talking points in March when he referred to the war as a “territorial dispute”, a remark he later sought to undo. But the window into his thinking had been opened.Most Republicans in Congress still back Ukraine, but the right of the party has moved into a different place, one illuminated by Tucker Carlson’s debut Twitter show this week, his first since his firing by Fox News. There he described Zelenskiy, who is Jewish, as “sweaty and rat-like … a persecutor of Christians … shifty, dead-eyed”, suggesting without evidence, and in a perfect echo of Moscow, that the hand of Kyiv lay behind the destruction of the Kakhovka dam.We already knew that much is at stake in the November 2024 presidential election, not least the life expectancy of US democracy. But there is something else, too. Ukraine is engaged in a profound battle for its own survival as an independent nation, and for larger principles essential to the whole world: that freedom must prevail, and that aggression must not. Ukraine cannot win that fight alone. It cannot win only with the backing of its European neighbours, which, though necessary, is not sufficient. It requires the United States, its muscle and its money. The plight of Kherson and the indictment in Miami are linked: the world desperately needs the defeat of Donald Trump.
      Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist 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

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Sunak’s foreign policy: a Europe-shaped hole | Editorial

      by

      The alliance between Britain and the US, resting on deep foundations of shared history and strategic interest, is not overly affected by the personal relationship between a prime minister and a president.Sometimes individual affinity is consequential, as when Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were aligned over cold war doctrine, or when Tony Blair put Britain in lockstep with George W Bush for the march to war in Iraq. But there is no prospect of Rishi Sunak forming such a partnership – for good or ill – with Joe Biden at this week’s Washington summit.Viewed from the White House, the prime minister cuts an insubstantial figure – the caretaker leader of a country that has lost its way. That doesn’t jeopardise the underlying relationship. Britain is a highly valued US ally, most notably in the fields of defence, security and intelligence. On trade and economics, Mr Sunak’s position is less comfortable. The prime minister is a poor match with a president who thinks Brexit was an epic blunder and whose flagship policy is a rebuttal of the sacred doctrines of the Conservative party.Mr Biden is committed to shoring up American primacy by means of massive state support for green technology, tax breaks for foreign investment and reconfiguring supply chains with a focus on national security. Mr Sunak’s instincts are more laissez-faire, and his orthodox conservative budgets preclude interventionist statecraft.The two men disagree on a fundamental judgment about the future direction of the global economy, but only one of them has a hand on the steering wheel. Mr Sunak looks more like a passenger, or a pedestrian, since Britain bailed out of the EU – the vehicle that allows European countries to aggregate mid-range economic heft into continental power.London lost clout in the world by surrendering its seat in Brussels, but that fact is hard for Brexit ideologues to process. Their worldview is constructed around the proposition that EU membership depleted national sovereignty and that leaving the bloc would open more lucrative trade routes. Top of the wishlist was a deal with Washington, and Mr Biden has said that won’t happen. Even if it did, the terms would be disadvantageous to Britain as the supplicant junior partner.If Mr Sunak grasps that weakness, he dare not voice it. Instead, Downing Street emits vague noises about Britain’s leading role in AI regulation. But, in governing uses of new technology, Brussels matters more to Washington. London is not irrelevant, but British reach is reduced when ministers are excluded from the rooms where their French, German and other continental counterparts develop policy.Those are the relationships that Mr Sunak must cultivate with urgency. But his view of Europe is circumscribed by Brexit ideology and parochial campaign issues. His meetings with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, have been dominated by the domestic political obsession with small-boat migration across the Channel. The prime minister has no discernible relationship with the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz. He has not visited Berlin.Negotiating the Windsor framework to stabilise Northern Ireland’s status in post-Brexit trade was a vital step in repairing damage done by Boris Johnson and Liz Truss to UK relations with the EU. But there is still a gaping European hole in Britain’s foreign policy. It is visible all the way across the Atlantic, even if the prime minister refuses to see it. More