Miliband is bad enough for the FCO, let alone the EU Jules Evans
November 2, 2009 | More on Conflict and security, Global system | 9 comments
David Miliband is in Russia, the first visit there by a British foreign minister since 2004, though Lord Mandelson was there last year, and did relatively well at cleaning up the mess that the FCO had made of Anglo-Russian relations.
I wonder if this trip, rather than having anything to do with serving our national interest, is actually aimed at furthering Miliband’s ambitions to become the new EU foreign secretary (a New Labour minister using office to further their own private interests? Shurely not!)
One of the key – if not the key – jobs of the new EU foreign minister will be managing relations with Russia. This will be a very difficult role, with the EU’s need for Russian gas and a friendly relationship with its largest neighbour needing to be balanced against New Europe’s desire for a strong, assertive stance against Russian authoritarianism and in support of NATO eastward expansion.
So far, the British political elite, with the exception of Mandelson, has shown itself incapable of nuance in their approach to Russia. During the Russo-Georgian War, for example, Miliband penned an article for The Times which was incredibly one-sided, putting all the blame for the situation squarely on Russia’s shoulders, and casting Saakashvili’s Georgia as the poor democratic victim in the war.
It was a bizarrely undiplomatic letter from a foreign secretary, and very much suggested Miliband was, again, serving his own interests (this was during his failed leadership bid in the summer of 2008) rather than the interests of his country.
In the last few weeks, the EU has released its report into the war, deciding that, actually, Georgia started it, and that the war was as much about Georgian nationalist aggression against the Ossetians as it was about Russian meddling in Georgia. That’s not to say that the Russian government was in any way innocent – it is in many ways an odious regime – but it shows that Miliband’s article was the sort of one-sided naive polemic one would expect from, say, a New Statesman columnist rather than the serving foreign secretary.
A month later, Miliband again showed his diplomatic nous by getting Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov into such a rage that, during a phone conversation, Lavrov apparently descended into a ‘four letter tirade’ against our young secretary of state, saying ‘who the fuck are you to lecture me’, and questioning what exactly Miliband knew of Russian history. Bad enough – but then Miliband released the story of Lavrov’s tirade to the press!
It was like getting into a fight, and then running to mummy to say that so-and-so had called you names. Again, Miliband seemed to be trying to improve his own domestic image, as the incredibly courageous defender of human rights in distant lands, rather than genuinely serving his own country’s interests.
For Miliband, as with much of the British political elite, it is simply too easy and too tempting to score domestic political points by railing against Russian authoritarianism. It costs them nothing. It makes them feel brave. And it helps them forget how the British government approved the torture of British citizens.
And now, after all this grand-standing, all this name-calling, and after absolutely no change in Russian foreign policy, Miliband is off to Moscow, simpering all the way about ‘common ground’ and ‘the need for mutual respect’.
This, it seems to me, is an attempt by Miliband to show the Germans that he could be an effective EU negotiator with the Russians. But to me, it shows once again why he is simply unfit to manage anyone’s foreign relations, ours, theirs, anyone’s.
Delicious
Rss
Twitter - David Steven
Complexity and nuance are not taught in English schools. Therefore, Miliband is playing to the reality that is the English.
An intersting post – I assume peeps on global dashboard have abandoned any political careers they might want to have had in the UK. Slating the For Sec perhaps not the best idea.
Chances are, Miliband did lots of work behind the scenes to see if he could secure the high rep job – anything short of 100% guarantees is too high risk. Why? If Miliband went for the high rep job and lost, his British political career will be in complete tatters. The Labour Party faithful (note – serious gap in global dashboard knowledge given most have probably never knocked on a single door come election time) would never have forgiven him. So, instead Miliband will probably become the next leader of the opposition and subsequently probably the PM after Cameron’s five year term (which can only really be a complete disaster). Rather like 1992, the best election to ever lose.
Miliband’s relations with Russia will indeed then be very interesting. At least Dave kind of gets it – the Russian’s aren’t Europeans – stop pretending they are…
The post is only my opinion – I’ve no idea if others in the team share my opinion, or if they harbour secret longings for public office. I’m a journalist, not a politician, so the idea of writing a sycophantic post with an eye to securing the patronage of the powerful is quite alien to me!
What does the ‘Europeanness’ of Russia have to do with anything? What does ‘European’ mean?
Hi Jules
Don’t get me wrong – I’m not really a Miliband fan and indeed have no problem with decent journalism – this isn’t it. I think your points aren’t really very well made and poorly supported. You would have been far better to attack him in his South Asia record where he’s had a perculiar habit of offending the Indian’s for some cryptic reason best known to the FCO.
The ‘Europeaness’ of Russia – as you say, hasn’t got much to do with the price of bread, other than Miliband has at least bothered to raise some politically uncomfortable questions with Moscow (albeit in an irratic way). N.B. BP had a minor heart attack when it happened – politically cheap or not, it was incredible that back in the day, London was supposed to be totally ok with KGB chaps running around Kensington with nuclear materials in back pockets. As for impresssing the German’s I really don’t think that was part of the calculus. Berlin are more than happy to deal direct with the Russian’s (you might have heard of a pipeline called Nord Stream which will make a total mockery of all forms of ‘European’ solidarity in about eigth years time). I’ll get back to you with a definition of ‘European’ some time around then…
Amyway, enough pointless points from me. On the views issue, it might be worth noting a little more upfront that personal views are personal views on global dashboard – not that I care, but some of you fellow contributors might.
Hasta luego.
Well, we’re not a whip-driven political party, we’re a blog! But certainly, David and Alex are very tolerant and hands-off editors and have never tried to edit me at all, which I appreciate. All my crazy views are my own.
As to your points, they seem even less well argued than mine – my piece was about Miliband’s appropriateness for the job of EU foreign minister, so his views on South East Asia are obviously not as relevant as his views on Russia, the EU’s largest neighbour and the source of a quarter of its gas.
And of course Germany cares about the ability of any prospective EU foreign minister candidate to get on with Russia, as Miliband would be all too aware.
Finally, yes, of course I’ve heard of Nord Stream. I was present at the beginning of its construction, in Russia:
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/opinion.xml?lang=en&nic=opinion&pid=260
As an editor of the site, let me underline that we do not aim for any collective position on GD. This is a group blog, not an attempt to express or advance a coherent ideology.
Personally, I hope David Miliband does become High Rep for reasons similar to Alex’s post supporting Blair’s Presidency. I also think the FCO, Labour Party and Miliband himself are tough enough to take criticism.
Fair enough chaps – it is an entertaining site! Far be it from me to suggets a gagging order!!
On substance,for my money ‘Europe’ has no mandate to deal with Russia. As you note, this is ultimately an energy relationship which means it is bilateral – i.e. Germany – Russia (a couple of other smaller playeres in the mix) – normatively it shouldn’t be, but never mind..
Last time I checked India was not in South Asia… – with fact checks like that I would recommend applying to the Indi… also kinda makes it important to EU High Rep role…
Cheers
Apologies, India not being in South East Asia – my application is being fired to Roger Alton now!!
So the potential stance of an EU High Rep. towards Russia needs to be less politically righteous and more pragmatic?