Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Boris Johnson says (again) he is going to Moscow; just as Britain gets booted off World Court

The foreign minister of a declining minor power is going empty-handed to the capital of a great one

Alexander Mercouris

Published

on

7,987 Views

Back on 23rd June 2017 – Brexit referendum day – I wrote an article for The Duran in which I said that because of the rapid decline of British power whether Britain voted for or against Brexit in terms of international relations no longer mattered.

The truth about Brexit which is never spoken but which everyone outside Britain knows is that Britain no longer matters very much. 

Though Britain in terms of its international rankings remains a large economy, it is an uncompetitive and declining one, running large deficits with the rest of the world and desperately over-dependent on a bloated housing market and an often corrupt financial services industry to stay afloat. 

The British military, which just 70 years ago bestrode the world, is now a shadow, looked upon with contempt by its US ally as it shows itself incapable of even defending small villages against lightly armed insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.  Certainly the British military today would be incapable of carrying out the kind of operation the Russian military is currently carrying out in Syria, or which Britain itself carried out 34 years ago during the 1982 war in the Falklands.  Though the British parliament pompously debated a military intervention in Syria last autumn as if Britain’s military involvement there actually mattered, barely anything has been heard of it since.  Apparently a couple of dozen bombs have been dropped to practically no effect.

In terms of world diplomacy, where as recently as the 1980s Margaret Thatcher cut a commanding figure, Britain’s complete marginalisation has recently become all too obvious. 

One of the reasons for the current ongoing political crisis in Britain – with a disintegrating government and an incoherent opposition – is that since Brexit referendum day this terrible truth has started to hit home.

The central assumption the British made even before the vote for Brexit took place was that a British vote for Brexit would trigger a huge existential crisis within the European Union, which would make the Europeans anxious to come to terms with Britain on Britain’s terms as soon as possible.

The result was that the British indulged in fantasies that they could have whatever Brexit they wanted, including one which allow them to limit immigration from the European Union whilst retaining unrestricted access to the European Single Market.

Theresa May’s whole negotiating strategy – to the extent she has one – was based on this assumption.

In the event – and as was entirely predictable, but as the British completely failed to predict – the Europeans quickly recovered from the shock and moved on to other things, showing no willingness to make concessions to the British about anything.

The result is that the British have been left twisting in the wind, wringing their hands with no idea what to do.

The British have now been given yet another painful lesson about their own increasing irrelevance.

For the first time in history there is no British judge on the International Court of Justice – the so-called “World Court” which judges interstate disputes – even though allocation of one of the seats on its bench is normally automatic for a candidate proposed by one of the UN Security Council’s permanent members, such as Britain.

In voting at the UN the British candidate was defeated by the Indian candidate, who now takes the British candidate’s place on the World Court.

In a sense that is as it should be.

By every objective measure India – a country which unlike Britain is rapidly rising towards Great Power status – is a far more powerful country than Britain.  Not only does it have a much bigger economy than Britain’s, but unlike Britain it is also a major regional power with large and powerful armed forces, and a worldwide and effective diplomatic presence.

Objectively it is India not Britain which should be a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and it is a major weakness of the UN system that it is not.

For the British elite this further sign of Britain’s rapidly diminishing status comes however as a bitter blow, provoking more rationalising and handwringing.

Recently Theresa May – Britain’s weak and indecisive Prime Minister – delivered a bizarre speech in which she appeared to threaten Russia because of its alleged election meddling and supposed attack on the international system

And the comprehensive new economic partnership we seek will underpin our shared commitment to open economies and free societies in the face of those who seek to undermine them.

Chief among those today, of course, is Russia.

In a recent speech President Putin said that while the interests of states do not always coincide, strategic gains cannot be made at the expense of others. When a state fails to observe universal rules of conduct and pursues its interests at any cost, it will provoke resistance and disputes will become unpredictable and dangerous.

I say to President Putin, I agree. But it is Russia’s actions which threaten the international order on which we all depend.

I want to be clear about the scale and nature of these actions.

Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea was the first time since the Second World War that one sovereign nation has forcibly taken territory from another in Europe. Since then, Russia has fomented conflict in the Donbas, repeatedly violated the national airspace of several European countries, and mounted a sustained campaign of cyber espionage and disruption. This has included meddling in elections, and hacking the Danish Ministry of Defence and the Bundestag, among many others.

It is seeking to weaponise information. Deploying its state-run media organisations to plant fake stories and photo-shopped images in an attempt to sow discord in the West and undermine our institutions.

So I have a very simple message for Russia.

We know what you are doing. And you will not succeed. Because you underestimate the resilience of our democracies, the enduring attraction of free and open societies, and the commitment of Western nations to the alliances that bind us.

The UK will do what is necessary to protect ourselves, and work with our allies to do likewise.

That is why we are driving reform of NATO so this vital alliance is better able to deter and counter hostile Russian activity. It is why we have stepped up our military and economic support to Ukraine.

It is why we are strengthening our cyber security and looking at how we tighten our financial regimes to ensure the profits of corruption cannot flow from Russia into the UK.

So we will take the necessary actions to counter Russian activity. But this is not where we want to be – and not the relationship with Russia we want.

We do not want to return to the Cold War, or to be in a state of perpetual confrontation.

So whilst we must beware, we also want to engage – which is why in the coming months the Foreign Secretary will be visiting Moscow.

For there is another way.

Many of us here looked at a post-Soviet Russia with hope.

Because we know that a strong and prosperous Russia which plays by the rules would be in the interests of the United Kingdom, Europe and the world.

As a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council, Russia has the reach and the responsibility to play a vital role in promoting international stability.

Russia can, and I hope one day will, choose this different path.

But for as long as Russia does not, we will act together to protect our interests and the international order on which they depend.

This speech, coming a few weeks before British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson’s planned but repeatedly delayed trip to Moscow, was remarkably ill-timed if Johnson’s trip is intended to begin the improvement in relations with Russia that Britain desperately needs.

This is not because the Russians will have been made especially angry by it.  Some Russians – mainly in the media and the Duma – were offended by it.  However Britain’s loss of power is now so great that it is doubtful that those in Moscow who actually shape foreign policy – Putin, Medvedev, Lavrov, Patrushev, Matviyenko and Shoigu – paid much attention to it.  After all the idea of Britain threatening Russia is today a laughable one.

The real problem with Theresa May’s speech is that yet again it underlines the British elite’s inability to come to terms with the reality of Britain’s decline.

It shows that instead of the serious effort to begin a rapprochement with Russia that on any objective assessment Britain needs, all that we are going to get from Boris Johnson’s trip to Moscow is the same thing that was promised or threatened before: yet another lecture about Russian misbehaviour, which the Russians will of course ignore.

How that advances British interests at a time of British decline I am wholly unable to see.

Though a declining power, Britain still retains important assets – an important geographical position, a large though increasingly uncompetitive economy, expertise in providing financial services, and a major cultural presence – which could be used to carve out for Britain an important position which might stabilise or even reverse its decline.

However that requires a realistic understanding of Britain’s position, and the fact that it is only causing damage to itself by setting itself up as the implacable enemy of Russia, one of the world’s Great Powers and the Great Power which is physically present in Britain’s European neighbourhood.

Britain is simply throwing away trading possibilities and diplomatic manoeuvre space – both of which it needs to stay relevant – by not realising this.

Suffice to say that this strange behaviour is being copied by none of Britain’s major European allies.  All three of them – Germany, France and Italy – trade with Russia actively, and engage with it diplomatically, in a way that Britain has long ceased to do.

Bismarck once said that Prussia could not afford to leave covered any squares on the chessboard of European politics.  He said that in order to justify his policy of rapprochement with Russia.

Today Britain finds itself in exactly the same position.

It is time the British elite understood this and put their delusions and prejudices to one side.

Unless they do so Britain’s decline will continue and will accelerate.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

Latest

Putin, Trump meet in Helsinki for first bilateral summit

The Helsinki summit is the first ever full-fledged meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Their previous encounters were brief talks on the sidelines of the G20 and APEC summits in 2017.

Vladimir Rodzianko

Published

on

Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump are meeting in the Finnish capital of Helsinki for their first bilateral one-on-one meeting.

Trump arrived in the Finland capital a day early, while the jet of Putin, who wrapped up his nation’s hosting of the World Cup Sunday, touched down around 1 p.m. local time and the Russian president’s motorcade whisked him straight to the palace where the two world leaders are meeting.

Trump signed an August 2017 law imposing additional sanctions on Russia. The law bars Trump from easing many sanctions without Congress’ approval, but he can offer some relief without a nod from Congress.

Almost 700 Russian people and companies are under U.S. sanctions. Individuals face limits on their travel and freezes on at least some of their assets, while some top Russian state banks and companies, including oil and gas giants, are effectively barred from getting financing through U.S. banks and markets.

The agenda of the summit hasn’t been officially announced yet, though, the presidents are expected to discuss global crises, such as the Syrian conflict and Ukraine, as well as bilateral relations.

Stay tuned for updates…

Continue Reading

Latest

“Foreign entity, NOT RUSSIA” hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails (Video)

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tx): Hillary Clinton’s cache of 30,000 emails was hacked by foreign actor, and it was not Russia.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

A stunning revelation that hardly anyone in the mainstream media is covering.

Fox News gave Louie Gohmert (R-Tx) the opportunity to explain what was going on during his questioning of Peter Strzok, when the the Texas Congressman stated that a “foreign entity, NOT RUSSIA” hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Aside from this segment on Fox News, this story is not getting any coverage, and we know why. It destroys the entire ‘Russia hacked Hillary’ narrative.

Gohmert states that this evidence is irrefutable and shows that a foreign actor, not connected to Russia in any way, intercepted and distributed Hillary Clinton’s cache of 30,000 emails.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Via Zerohedge

As we sift through the ashes of Thursday’s dumpster-fire Congressional hearing with still employed FBI agent Peter Strzok, Luke Rosiak of the Daily Caller plucked out a key exchange between Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tx) and Strzok which revealed a yet-unknown bombshell about the Clinton email case.

Nearly all of Hillary Clinton’s emails on her homebrew server went to a foreign entity that isn’t Russia. When this was discovered by the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), IG Chuck McCullough sent his investigator Frank Ruckner and an attorney to notify Strzok along with three other people about the “anomaly.”

Four separate attempts were also made to notify DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz to brief him on the massive security breach, however Horowitz “never returned the call.” Recall that Horowitz concluded last month that despite Strzok’s extreme bias towards Hillary Clinton and against Donald Trump – none of it translated to Strzok’s work at the FBI.

In other words; Strzok, while investigating Clinton’s email server, completely ignored the fact that most of Clinton’s emails were sent to a foreign entity – while IG Horowitz simply didn’t want to know about it.

Daily Caller reports…

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found an “anomaly on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through their private server, and when they had done the forensic analysis, they found that her emails, every single one except four, over 30,000, were going to an address that was not on the distribution list,” Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas said during a hearing with FBI official Peter Strzok.

Gohmert continued..

“It was going to an unauthorized source that was a foreign entity unrelated to Russia.”

Strzok admitted to meeting with Ruckner but said he couldn’t remember the “specific” content of their discussion.

“The forensic examination was done by the ICIG and they can document that,” Gohmert said, “but you were given that information and you did nothing with it.”

According to Zerohedge “Mr. Horowitz got a call four times from someone wanting to brief him about this, and he never returned the call,” Gohmert said – and Horowitz wouldn’t return the call.

And while Peter Strzok couldn’t remember the specifics of his meeting with the IG about the giant “foreign entity” bombshell, he texted this to his mistress Lisa Page when the IG discovered the “(C)” classification on several of Clinton’s emails – something the FBI overlooked:

“Holy cow … if the FBI missed this, what else was missed? … Remind me to tell you to flag for Andy [redacted] emails we (actually ICIG) found that have portion marks (C) on a couple of paras. DoJ was Very Concerned about this.”

Via Zerohedge

In November of 2017, IG McCullough – an Obama appointee – revealed to Fox News that he received pushback when he tried to tell former DNI James Clapper about the foreign entity which had Clinton’s emails and other anomalies.

Instead of being embraced for trying to expose an illegal act, seven senators including Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca) wrote a letter accusing him of politicizing the issue.

“It’s absolutely irrelevant whether something is marked classified, it is the character of the information,” he said. Fox News reports…

McCullough said that from that point forward, he received only criticism and an “adversarial posture” from Congress when he tried to rectify the situation.

“I expected to be embraced and protected,” he said, adding that a Hill staffer “chided” him for failing to consider the “political consequences” of the information he was blowing the whistle on.

Continue Reading

Latest

Donald Trump plays good cop and bad cop with a weak Theresa May (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 55.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

US President Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK was momentous, not for its substance, but rather for its sheer entertainment value.

Trump started his trip to the United Kingdom blasting Theresa May for her inability to negotiate a proper Brexit deal with the EU.  Trump ended his visit holding hands with the UK Prime Minister during a press conference where the most ‘special relationship’ between the two allies was once again reaffirmed.

Protests saw giant Trump “baby balloons” fly over London’s city center, as Trump played was his own good cop and bad cop to the UK PM, outside London at the Chequers…often times leaving May’s head spinning.

Even as Trump has left London, he remains front and center in the mind of Theresa May, who has now stated that Trump advised her to “sue” the European Union to resolve the tense negotiations over Brexit.

Trump had mentioned to reporters on Friday at a joint press conference with Theresa May that he had given the British leader a suggestion that she found too “brutal.”

Asked Sunday on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show what that suggestion was, May: “He told me I should sue the EU. Not go into negotiation, sue them.” May added…

“What the president also said at that press conference was `Don’t walk away. Don’t walk away from the negotiations. Then you’re stuck.”‘

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris summarize what was a state visit like no other, as Trump trolled the UK PM from beginning to end, and left London knowing that he got the better of a weakened British Prime Minister, who may not survive in office past next week.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Via CNBC

It wasn’t exactly clear what Trump meant. The revelation came after explosive and undiplomatic remarks Trump made this week about May’s leadership — especially her handling of the Brexit negotiations — as he made his first official visit to Britain.

In an interview with The Sun newspaper published Thursday — just as May was hosting Trump at a lavish black-tie dinner — Trump said the British leader’s approach likely “killed” chances of a free-trade deal with the United States. He said he had told May how to conduct Brexit negotiations, “but she didn’t listen to me.”

He also praised May’s rival, Boris Johnson, who quit last week as foreign secretary to protest May’s Brexit plans. Trump claimed Johnson would make a “great prime minister.”

The comments shocked many in Britain — even May’s opponents — and threatened to undermine May’s already fragile hold on power. Her Conservative government is deeply split between supporters of a clean break with the EU and those who want to keep close ties with the bloc, Britain’s biggest trading partner.

Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Advertisement

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement
Advertisements
Advertisement
Advertisements

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!

The Duran Newsletter

Trending