Cameron stands encircled by zealous Anglo-neocons
An influential coterie of Tory MPs is bent on a foreign policy driven not by Britain’s interests, but those of the US and Israel
Geoffrey Wheatcroft, The Guardian
Last September, David Cameron queried Tony Blair’s unwavering (and unrewarded) loyalty to the Bush administration. The speech made Cameron unpopular in Washington, but that should have done him no harm with the British electorate, given what most of them think of George Bush. Yet
however welcome Cameron’s apparent turn in foreign policy might be with the public, he has a problem with his own parliamentary party. For years past the Tories have been infiltrated by Anglo-neoconservatives, a species easily defined. Several of the younger MPs are fanatical adherents of the creed with its three prongs: ardent support for the Iraq war, for the US and for Israel.
You might think that the first of those prongs was dented after the disaster which has unfolded. What would have happened if the Tories had opposed the war is one of the more fascinating “ifs” of history; but they didn’t, and the moment has passed when they could have adroitly dissociated themselves from the war because of the false claims on which it was begun and the incompetence with which it was conducted.
[..] In most European countries there is a party of the right whose basic definition is its attachment to the national interest of that country. Only here is there a Conservative party, and Tory press, largely in the hands of people whose basic commitment is to the national interest of
another country, or countries.
[..] One more from the latest vintage is Douglas Carswell MP, who insists that “it is in our national interest to support Israel”. He would never wish to say anything critical of Israel, “because I believe they are a front-line ally in a war against people who wish to destroy our democratic way of life. Others may take a nuanced view. I don’t.”
[..] The Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI) are a successful force, now claiming a large majority of Tory MPs as members. It is frankly perverse for Charles Moore to complain in the Daily Telegraph that the Conservatives have gone awry since the good old days, when the natural Tory outlook included “a greater sympathy for Israel than for those who were trying to destroy her”, since if anything the change has been the other way round. CONTINUE
This statement is unbelievable, he actually thinks to support Israel is an extremist view.
And worse than this column are the comments after it. It is simply inconcievable to these people that supporting Israel and America is in fact in Britain’s interest. They cannot grasp that Israel’s enemies are also their’s, as well as the rest of the free world. In the convoluted world view of these people, it would better serve Britain’s interest to side with hamas and hezbollah. Sadly, outside of this group of Tories, Britain has become a confused, morally bankrupt nation gripped with fear and unwilling to defend itself. They will get a rude awakening if they believe throwing Israel to the wolves will make them safe from the wrath of islamists.
Also, the author longs for the days in which the Tories were the party of anti-Semites opposing the existence of Israel. What a disgrace Wheatcroft is, along with those commenters.
Does it ever occur to Geoffrey Wheatcroft that Britain’s interest in fact coincides with America and Israel’s? Would it ever occur to him that all countries of the free world have a similar interest in defeating the global jihad?
As opposed to what Wheatcroft? Who exactly should these “fanatical adherents” support? The Darfur Janjaweed? Russia? Hamas?
Could it be that those young “fanatical adherents” (compare them with the fanatical adherents of Islam for a nice, neat comparison) are actually far more intelligent than folks like Wheatcroft?
Admittedly this isn’t a stretch, but it’s worth pondering.