From our UK edition
I think Chris Morris's new film Four Lions is probably the (English-speaking) world's first suicide-bomber comedy. So it's all but guaranteed to offend just about everyone. Splendid. Doubtless it's a sign of terrible, even craven decadence to admit to looking forward to seeing it...
From our UK edition
He may be a chateau-bottled shyster, but there is no better communicator of policy than Alastair Campbell. He has penned an article in the FT arguing that the lesson that should have been learned from the Iraq war was how to communicate strategic ideas and objectives. The lack of clarity that came to define Iraq now afflicts Afghanistan: ‘It was hard to discern that approach in the run-up to the Afghan surge being announced, or after it. The surge should have been followed by co-ordinated communications across the alliance. That job is not being done with the vigour and consistency that it should, and the systems of co-ordination have weakened since Iraq.
From our UK edition
Seriousness comes naturally to Gordon Brown and yesterday he gave a speech detailing how Britain is defending itself by striking at the heart of the ‘crucible of terror’. What Brown has in seriousness of delivery, he lacks in realism. Britain has not fought for such a sustained period since the high-water mark of empire; but the ambitions of two prime ministers, and to be fair the severity of the threat that Britain faces, have outstripped resources; Britain is now completely over-extended. Hours after Brown’s speech, Baroness Kinnock divulged that anti-terror measures run by the Foreign Office have been cut – anti-narcotics campaigns in Afghanistan and de-radicalisation programmes in Pakistan.
From our UK edition
An idea that has received little media attention in Britain, but is giving Foreign Office diplomats sleepless nights, is David Miliband’s push for a "regional stabilisation council" involving Pakistan, India and Afghanistan, to be unveiled at the international conference scheduled for January 28. The idea is seen as an innovate way to bring the three countries together, while at the same time allowing the Foreign Secretary, who will formally host the conference, to show leadership and initiative. The pretender to the post-election Labour throne needs something to get rid of his “Banana Boy” epithet. So far, however, the idea is not meeting with local support.
From our UK edition
Since September 11, Britain has lost one war and is not winning another. But the question of why this is the case remains depressingly low down the agenda. There is remarkably little interest in why the “British army was defeated in the field in southern Iraq”, to quote Gordon Brown's and David Miliband’s favourite counter-insurgency expert, David Kilcullen. Today, the Tories launched their green paper on national security with speeches by Pauline Neville-Jones and David Cameron. The document is a mixed bag. But the Tories deserve credit for squarely facing up to the fact that Britain is now an “incubator of extremism and an exporter of terrorism”.
From our UK edition
We have led the magazine this week on coming Tory defence cuts, with a brilliant piece by Max Hastings. Look closely at the cover image (our second by Christian Adams) and you can see the guillotine blade will hit he RAF and Navy guys before the Army. This, Hastings argues, will be the effect of the Tory Strategic Defence Review. And even this will leave cuts of up to 20 per cent across the defence budget under the Tories. How could Cameron justify that, in this dangerous world of ours? David Cameron prepares the ground today with an important speech in Chatham House promising “one of the most radical departures in security policy we’ve seen in decades”. He goes on to say that “We need to do much better at stopping wars from ever starting.
From our UK edition
The think tank, Chatham House, is the next venue for Cameron’s intermittent policy blitz. He will unveil his national security strategy, part of which, the Telegraph reports, will enable the government to raid the international development budget to fund military projects. ‘The Conservatives are committed to increasing the international development budget to meet a United Nations target of spending 0.7 per cent of gross national product on aid. However, some Tories believe the party can honour that pledge by counting some spending done by the Ministry of Defence as development aid, since the work of the Armed Forces contributes to the development of countries like Afghanistan.
From our UK edition
Irony of ironies, proselytising liberal and convinced egalitarian, Anjem Choudary, told the Today programme that the banning of Islam4UK, al-Muhajiroun and their aliases is a ‘failure of democracy’. A further irony is that he is right, sort of. Alan Johnson's decision is understandable but incorrect; the surest way to silence these repugnant extremists and reactionaries is through equality and free debate, even though they hold those principles in contempt. The members of Islam4UK abuse freedom to peddle their reactionary ideals and disregard their duties towards society, but that is no reason to proscribe the group.
From our UK edition
I'd like to think that if the Christmas Day underwear-bomber had been en route to London rather than Detroit then our response to the attempted attack would have been a little more phlegmatic than the Cousins' but I'm not wholly convinced that would have been the case. So Fareed Zakaria's excellent column in today's WaPo applies to this country too. The whole thing is well worth reading* but Zakaria's intro and conclusion are especially bang-on: In responding to the attempted bombing of an airliner on Christmas Day, Senator Dianne Feinstein voiced the feelings of many when she said that to prevent such situations, "I'd rather overreact than underreact." This appears to be the consensus view in Washington, but it is quite wrong. The purpose of terrorism is to provoke an overreaction.
From our UK edition
According to James Carville there'd be 67 Democratic Senators if it weren't for those ghastly chaps at Fox News. As with everything Carville says this must be taken with a pinch of salt. Nevetheless one need not look too hard to discover evidence of the impact Fox has had on American journalism* in precincts far from and not naturally disposed to take their orders from Roger Ailes' command-bunker. Why, the very same edition of the New York Times contains an excellent example of how Fox's "framing" of an issue has leached into the mainstream. In the paper's Week in Review section Helene Cooper "examines" the burning issue of whether Barack Obama is a wimp or a warrior... The answer is, of course, that like all Democrats Obama is a wimp.
From our UK edition
British readers probably don't need any reminding that Congressman Peter King (R-NY) spent decades raising money for the IRA and championing their cause at every available opportunity. However my experience is that plenty of Americans remain all too unaware of his terrorism-supporting record. Happily the nice folk at the Daily Beast asked if I'd compile a quick refresher course, detailing some of King's more egregious soft-on-terrorism moments. So here it is. It's also worth recalling that though King "broke" with the IRA in 2005 (so long ago!) and called for their disbandment he was still happy to shill for the Republican movement in the aftermath of the murder of Robert McCartney in a Belfast pub.
From our UK edition
The verdict is in and just about every part of the US intelligence community failed to perform. The Solomonic decision of President Obama is that no individual is at fault - no systemic leadership problems here - and so nobody will be held accountable. Instead, there will be improved processes and better technology. This was exactly the response after 9/11 when 3,000 people died. At that time, the man in charge of US intelligence, George Tenet, stayed in his job and was later given the Medal of Freedom - America's highest honor. This week's verdict was over the intelligence failures that led to a Nigerian boarding a flight in Amsterdam destined for Detroit, over Christmas, with explosives concealed in his underwear.
From our UK edition
In a few weeks time, a slew of foreign ministers will descend on London to attend a conference on Afghanistan. No.10 will use the event to sell Gordon Brown as a statesman, confidently dealing with the nation’s threats. The Conservatives, in turn, will probably try to score the usual points about Britain’s failure, alongside its NATO allies, to make any in-roads in the fight against the Taliban. Together with Tony Blair’s evidence to the Iraq Inquiry, the conference may create one of the few moments in the drawn-out election campaign when the three party leaders stop talking about the NHS and focus on national security issues instead.
From our UK edition
The knicker-bomber must love this. Twice Gordon Brown has jumped on the bandwagon and bounced straight off on both occasions. Sky News reports that the UK did not pass vital information to the US, despite the claims of a Downing Street spokesman. Here’s the key section: 'During a briefing to journalists today, the Prime Minister's spokesman said: "There is no suggestion the UK passed intelligence to the US that they did not act on." But Sky's political correspondent Joey Jones said it had been an "awful" briefing. "He tried to clear things up but only succeeded in muddying the waters still further," Jones said. "After he read Downing Street's statement, the spokesman said there would be no further comment on intelligence issues.
From our UK edition
In the wake of the Knicker-Bomber's attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner it's hardly a surprise that plenty of folk are calling for more rigorous profiling of muslim (or arab) passengers wanting to board aircraft. Some go so far as to suggest that all young muslim men should be strip-searched. Brother Blackburn doesn't go that far but does say that it's just common sense at work. Plenty of commenters agree with him. So, since I don't think profiling of this sort is a terribly good idea let me concede that it might make a difference to airline security. This might be the case even though there are plenty of examples, as David says, to remind one that any number of criminals would have escaped the kinds of profiling being suggested.
From our UK edition
The failed terrorist attack on a North West Airlines plane last month has reignited the debate about just what can be done to improve the performance of America’s intelligence agencies. Despite spending close to $100 billion since the attacks of 9/11 nine years ago, it has become clear in the aftermath of the failed attack that all the old problems that were identified after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon still remain: Intelligence is not shared effectively and the analysis of available data remains weak. To the reformers inside the intelligence community, none of this is exactly news. As money poured in after 9/11 there was little thought about overall strategy.
From our UK edition
What sort of war do we find ourselves fighting and, more than eight years after the destruction of the World Trade Center, who is winning? Like Norm, I commend a couple of columns from today's papers. First up it's Matt d'Ancona (late of this parish of course) in the Sunday Telegraph who writes: [T]here are two competing narratives in the West. The first is frightening, difficult and poses a host of deeply unwelcome questions. According to this version of events, we face a global struggle against a new mutation of militant Islamism ready to use all and any means at its disposal, bonded by anti-semitism, hatred of America and a desire to enforce sharia law and to restore the Caliphate. This network plots globally and kills locally. The merit of this is that it happens to be true.
From our UK edition
It is a truth, yet to be universally acknowledged, that the overwhelming majority of global terrorism is committed by radical Muslims. However, the Guardian reports that Whitehall has reached that conclusion and passenger profiling is “in the mix” of the latest airport security review. Thank God, sense prevails at last. The previous airport review, conducted in the aftermath of the liquid bomb plot, decided against profiling. What followed was a fatuous politically correct concoction. Even pilots’ toothpaste was examined; one pilot commented: “If I want to kill everyone (on board) I don’t faff around with plastic explosives, I point the nose at the ground”. Such determined absurdity should be behind us.
From our UK edition
As Melanie Phillips says in her article for this week's issue of the magazine, the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab highlights the role of other, less frequently discussed, countries in Islamist terror. One such country is Yemen, where Abdulmutallab is thought to have trained at an Al Qaeda camp. The US believes there may be a few hundred al Qaeda fighters in Yemen, centered on a group of key network leaders who are operating a number of camps. Yemen has slowly been getting more international attention. A few weeks ago I was meant to go on Al Jazeera, but my appearance was cancelled at the last minute because, I was told, of other “breaking news”. Curious, I turned on BBC and searched the internet to find out what the headline-grabbing story could be.
From our UK edition
The terrorist attacks on 9/11 succeeded because US intelligence failed to bring the various pieces of information together to prevent them. The attempted terrorist attack on a North West Airlines plane headed for Detroit almost succeeded because US intelligence failed to bring different pieces of information together that would have prevented the bomber getting on the plane. Between 2001 and today, the US has spent around $40 billion on counter terrorist improvements and even more on trying to improve intelligence. And yet, nothing much seems to have changed. In the current case, there was intelligence that the Yemen branch of Al Qaeda was using a ‘Nigerian’ as a bomber.