Britain’s foreign secretary is touted by many as a future prime minister and the saviour of his party—questions that the current torments of the Labour party have made especially urgent. In the unlikely event of a coup against Gordon Brown, David Miliband probably won’t be among either the ringleaders or the chief beneficiaries. But it is increasingly clear that this ambitious, intellectual and articulate politician has a central role to play in the future of British politics.
In our cover story this month, Miliband spoke to a panel of interviewers—Robert Cooper, Kishwer Falkner, David Goodhart, Dominic Lawson and Richard Reeves—in the fullest and frankest public exposition to date of his thinking as both a foreign secretary and Labour politician. It’s a confident, informed performance, and one which moves between the inevitable blandness of pre-prepared lines and some engagingly impassioned discourses on policy, the history of Labour thought, and the larger problems besetting modern politics.
Among other topics, Miliband discusses the nature and future of liberal intervention, great power rivalries in a globalised world, climate change, British politics, the future of Labour and the left—and why and how social inequalities need to be attacked. The scene is certainly set for a convincing post-election leadership challenge, if Labour lose and Miliband decides to stake his claim. How might the mantle of prime minister-in-waiting sit on him then, with a Cameron-led Conservative party in power?
As ever, please let us know your thoughts and share your comments below.
Share
Comments
Print
Add Comment
What would his father think? (A friend who knew the little Milibands well, whispered – ‘he would turn in his grave’ – actually a comment on Blairism.)
I would have like to know more about David Miliband’s view of Islam and the Muslim world, and was astonished about his persistent faith in the power of the USA.(I did not know then that he has an American wife and was in part educated there). The interview took place just before the really bad news arrived….
I was shocked once about his ignorance of science when he dared to claim, in the Vatican of all places and before a group of illustrious scientists, that the science of climate change was simple (more CO2, more heating of atmosphere, planet in danger).If only it was simple. His faith in leading the world in combatting climate change is likely to lead the UK into disaster, at home and abroad; even the Germans are now talking about having to adapt rather than reduce emissions seriosuly. Doing this at home will only harm their industries, as will funding the Chinese to do so. Soon the UK will be alone in madly erecting windmills etc
His views on Russia were disturbingly simplistic as well and ignorant of history; and we did not really learn what he thinks of the EU ‘democracy deficit’ – only that he want to be a ‘big’ player on the world stage. Good for him, bad for us.
“Germans are now talking about having to adapt rather than reduce emissions seriosuly [sic].”
No they are not. They are talking about ALSO adapting. If we ONLY adapt, we die.
Milliband is interesting. He admits clearly that New Labour is drawing on Sen. He also admits that climate change will involve collective action.
One of the main criticisms of Sen comes from his fellow countryman Baxi, who points out that Sen’s approach to entitlements and capabilities does not include the basic framework of rights required to support collective action and a profound long-term re-allocation of resources (which is also a basis for pluralism.)
So are we to have a framework of basic rights in relation to environment and climate change? Something that goes beyond the careerism of “I can” towards the reality of “we can change?” Because we must.
How about this for a radical proposition: Every person on this planet has a basic, non-trade-able entitlement to an equal share of the natural resources of this planet, based on their right to life and thus livelihood? What does such a proposition, if implemented, do to international relations and the concepts of entitlements and capabilities?
… Because if you are a farmer in India, or another one of the 50% on less than a dollar a day, the first “Can I” that you ask is “Can I eat?” or rather “Can we eat?” because you probably have a hungry family.
Which is also why climate change is generally NOT a low-impact risk. It threatens instability in food markets, which is a very profound risk for those in the 50%.
Too many words! Too much philosophising, too much of an haut en bas attitude towards the public. He speaks of them as though they were new-born birds waiting for their food. What the public want is not politics based upon deep thought – they want politics based upon competence. They want the country to be managed competently. With a Health Service free to all, an education system that allows kids who like mechanics to go to the appropriate school and those who like words to theirs, a justice system that is fair to the victim and firm with the criminal, a financial system that does the job it is supposed to do – facilitate economic development – and representation of their wishes in government. They do not want to be engineered. Instead of conducting polls to see if Harman can replace Brown, the public should be asked what they want in their lives. Original thought, eh? Just about the only Labour guru Miliband did not quote was Herbert Morison – ‘our work in politics must be to improve human nature.’ God save us.
@John Problem
“With a Health Service free to all, an education system that allows kids who like mechanics to go to the appropriate school and those who like words to theirs, a justice system that is fair to the victim and firm with the criminal, a financial system that does the job it is supposed to do – facilitate economic development”
“Just about the only Labour guru Miliband did not quote was Herbert Morison – ‘our work in politics must be to improve human nature.’ God save us.”
This would all be fine and Dandy if business as usual(BAU) were tenable. But BAU = 4 degrees of warming = mass death.
So it is time to start thinking.
“Eleven years on from 1997, it is a different world. Russia has invaded a neighbour; the situation in the middle east is very different, and so on.”
Oh dear. Why does David Miliband leave himself open to charges of hypocracy so often.
Can you ,like me, still visualise British bombers dropping their payloads of high explosives on the people of Kosovo.
You must all recall the bloody mess of southern Iraq and the loss of thousands of Iraqy lives and the deaths of hundreds our own blood.
And still the Imperialsm continues in Afghanistan with ever increasing numbers of dead British soldiers. Plus the indisciminate killing of civilians including wholly innocent children.
All this is in the name of British foreign policy.