I sent Keith's posting re: Claire Short to a colleague who follows these matters closely. He is a now retired political scientist. Maybe not so retired after all.
This is his response. arthur =========================================== To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Subject: Claire Short (Keith's posting) Arthur: Did you see that earlier today (I saw it posted in THE GUARDIAN, tomorrow's date, this evening but couldn't read more than the headline because I was on my way out for the evening), Claire Short posed the possibility of her resignation from the British Cabinet if the British and American government's attacked Iraq without a new vote approving UN sanctions. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2467679,00.html> Right now, though the possibility of war is being treated although it is over 90 per cent certain, I am inclined to think, if I had to put a number on it, that it is somewhere between a 67% to a 75% proposition - very likely, but not near certain (the impression of certainty has to be maintained if this is a psychological warfare exercise aimed at weakening Iraq, and, possibly, stimulating internal opposition that will make it easier to achieve regime change). It seems to me that there may be a declining probability, depending on what happens in Britain; Blair is essentially under siege from his own supporters, and it is reaching into the cabinet. As happened with Maggie Thatcher about a dozen years ago, a supposedly untouchable leader can be quickly ousted if there is a situation that favors a coup in her cabinet or caucus. So Blair's position is the weaker link. The pressure on Blair has been mounting for weeks. But, for the first time, it has somebody with a reputation, and a potential alternative PM, who is joining it (though I doubt that if Blair falls Short will replace him - I think that the Blair forces and those of his opportunistic rival, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, will unite to keep her out and put Brown in. Labour would probably go into the next election substantially weakened, because of the simmering resentment at such a catastrophe. Oddly, this makes me believe even more strongly that there is probably significant evidence, that cannot be revealed, that convinces Blair and Bush that Iraq must be taken on, and Saddam removed, at any cost. The reason that I take this position is not sheer perversity. First, Blair and Bush come at policy from essentially different positions, point of view, and perceptions of basic interests. Blair is a very cagey politician, and not a lightweight in any sense. The notion that he has simply loyally followed along as a tame poodle for Bush, and has risked as much as he has just to get some pats of approval (or somewhat more material rewards for his country) doesn't stand up to my reading of political behavior. I have rarely met, or observed, a capable politician who willingly will commit to a likely kamikaze dive, unless there is something that is pushing him in such a way that taking such risks seems to be less risky than facing some other possibility. And I think that Blair is facing danger that any self-serving, capable, politician would have sought either to avoid or to get out of long before this time. Second question: what happens if the British-U.S. resolution is withdrawn, or is defeated (either failing a majority in the Security Council or getting a majority, but being vetoed by the vote of one of the permanent members. I think I indicated this, as suggested to me by somebody with whom I had a conversation. To recap: the Americans might put forward a resolution asking for a vote, up or down, on whether Iraq had fully complied with the previous UN resolution. It is harder, in such a vote, to implement a veto, and they might get a majority to vote that Iraq had not complied fully, since some Council members could rationalize it to themselves as a vote without explicit consequences. But the U.S. could take this and use it as a rationalization that they got the vote that they were denied because of the formalities of the veto process, etc... The most recent U.S. polling data suggests that after his press conference last week, Bush regained some of the support in American opinion that had been slipping, but I don't recall the exact numbers. Last point: I think that, aside from the question of what happens in the Middle East, the international system, and the UN, the important thing to watch are shifts in U.S. political and economic sentiment. This may be a catalyst, whichever way things develop, to the domestic ethos and political agenda of the U.S. for the coming decade (or even more fundamental). Interestingly, another poll released last week, suggests that, among important issues, the war/peace issue only ranks third in the entire population sample that was surveyed. First is the economy; second is health care. In terms of the war/peace issues, Iraq is still only significant if embedded in the overall "war on terrorism." The possibility, if Bush (contrary to expectation, which I share) decides to pull back from the brink, what will he do to rationalize this. First, he will claim that the mobilization in the Gulf area produced results, and that the UN now has to ensure (with participation by all the powers) that the pressure of "armed diplomacy" is kept up on Iraq and against Saddam Hussein. Secondly, if he indeed has made further captures or other gains against Al Qaeda, there will be more attention on these successes and less on Iraq. Thirdly, there may be efforts (partially dissociated from "official" White House sources) to show the American people that they can live without their "false allies," and to retaliate in a number of smaller ways against those that have thwarted the Americans in what will continue to be presented as a legitimate right to engage in pre-emptive self-defense. If possible, more evidence will be leaked about the dangers that were seen, and the activities (linked to terrorism) in which Iraq may have been involved. This will set the stage for a confrontation in which lines are even more sharply drawn between an ideologized left and right wings in early 21st century America, and a possible further shift in the internal characteristics of the American system to be more in accord with a siege mentality or a "garrison state." Regards, -----Original Message----- From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 4:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Claire Short announces her decision Just announced on Channel 4 News (09-Mar-03; 20:56) As I half expected in my posting of 8 March, Claire Short -- without doubt the most respected Minister in Blair's government -- has now made her decision: <<<< Short says she will quit over Iraq The International Development Secretary Clare Short has said she will resign from the Cabinet if Britain goes to war with Iraq without a second UN resolution. Her resignation would make her the first senior member of Tony Blair's government to step down over the issue. Earlier, Prime Minister Tony Blair suffered the first Government resignation over the Iraqi crisis. Loughborough MP Andrew Reed confirmed he is standing down as Parliamentary Private Secretary to Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett. His decision to quit comes after warnings that Mr Blair could face a whole wave of Government resignations if he commits British troops to a war on Iraq without UN backing. Military action could result in the rebellion of up to 200 MPs and the resignation of as many as ten members of Mr Blair's Government, according to a straw poll in Westminster. >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
