Wednesday 8 January 2020

"It is a fact"


Look behind you, John!

Last night's BBC News at Ten featured the BBC's deputy political editor John Pienaar focusing on two things: firstly, "the uncomfortable truth" that British ministers now have little power to influence events or American presidents and, secondly, that Boris should have 'led the line' on the US-Iran 'crisis'. Here's his editorial in full:
Quite, Fiona. The uncomfortable truth is that chorusing the case for restraint is about the extent of British ministers' power to influence events in this crisis, whether it's the Defence Secretary in the House a short while ago or whether, like the Foreign Secretary, it involves talking to counterparts, or like Boris Johnson, who has been in contact with President Trump and also with the Iraqi leadership, among others. But he hasn't been speaking publicly on behalf of the Government. His absence in the House of Commons earlier on today was conspicuous. I doubt he'll mind too much being taunted about that by his defeated Labour rival today. But some Conservatives are also pointing out that past prime ministers have chosen to lead the line at moments of crisis on this scale. When you remember that Donald Trump acted without informing, let alone consulting Britain on what he was about to do, it is easier to make the case that Boris Johnson's clout in the White House is a lot less than that of past prime ministers with past presidents. Yes, some British officials, diplomats, intelligence officials, military personnel, have very good relationships with counterparts in Washington. But they are not, it seems, often the kind of people that Donald Trump wants to consult with. So at a time of crisis, at a time of definition for Britain's role in the world, Britain looks to many eyes, not just exposed, but also lacking the kind of clout that British ministers would like. That may or may not be a cause for political criticism. It is a fact.
In the preceding report, Nick Bryant also had a nibble at Boris:
In Parliament, it was the Defence Secretary rather than the Prime Minister who called for calm on all sides.

2 comments:

  1. "Quite, Fiona. The uncomfortable truth is that chorusing the case for restraint is about the extent of BBC's power to influence events in this crisis, whether it's Jeremy Bowen a short while ago or whether, like the Huw Edwards, it involves posting on Twitter or like Mark Mardell, who has been in contact with The Guardian and also with the Iraqi leadership, among others."

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't recall British Prime Ministers having much influence on American Presidents since about 1776.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.