The news from Libya, Bahrain and elsewhere has turned any joy that greeted the first flickers of rebellion in north Africa into a grim realisation that the world is now a far more complex place. The foreign office has been blamed where it did not deserve blame—over delayed evacuations and a bungled SAS operation—and avoided flak where it deserved heavy fire, over its flawed support for dictators, its failure to predict unrest and its feeble response when the crisis flared up. The unrest has also sparked sharp confrontation in the cabinet. Education secretary Michael Gove was reported to be “messianic” as he led demands for a more forceful response to the Libyan crisis while William Hague, true to foreign office tradition, was far more cautious, disgracefully arguing that it would be wrong to “pick winners” as events unfold.
So far, the internal debate has been between Tory hawks and doves. There are inevitable differences of opinion between optimists excited by the potential spread of democracy in the Arab world and self-styled realists adopting a more typical conservative position of non-interference. The prime minister has emerged as something of a liberal interventionist, leading international calls for the west to take action over Libya.
But the bigger question as we confront this unruly new world order is how far could the Lib Dems go if Britain becomes embroiled in a new conflict overseas? Having abandoned their pledge on tuition fees, one has to wonder if they would have the stomach for a messy foreign incursion. Their defining issue in recent years has, after all, been opposition to the Iraq war.
There is a solution: press Paddy Ashdown into service as foreign secretary. The unfortunate truth is William Hague has looked unconvincing in the spotlight of diplomacy—indeed, many in the party wonder if the fire has gone from his belly when it comes to politics. So why not move Hague into the party chairmanship or some other key role in which his undoubted talents would be better used, and bring Lord Ashdown back into the political frontline?
He has an impressive record on foreign affairs, especially during the break-up of Yugoslavia, when he showed political courage in lobbying for action to halt the atrocities. Given his unstoppable energy, his military record and his diplomatic service in Bosnia, he could, if necessary, reassure both his party and the nation that supporting oppressed people demanding civil society is very different from supporting a US president seeking to impose democracy in Iraq.
Ashdown has been a vociferous cheerleader for the government despite his initial doubts, and has strong personal links on both sides of the coalition. He might need a hardline Eurosceptic as Europe minister to reassure the Tory right, but the former Lib Dem leader is a popular figure even in those quarters. And it is hard to see a stronger contender among senior Conservatives.
Such a move would be a bold measure to underpin the coalition, while providing valuable support for both the prime minister and his deputy. Ashdown wanted a cabinet post under Tony Blair. He rejected one under Gordon Brown. Perhaps his time has finally come under David Cameron.
les
Ashdown? – Are you mad?
Henry Smith
Bonkers.
Tom Nightingale
Former speech writer for Cameron.
I’d noticed Cameron was no longer so shallow.
Paula Varley
It’s a leap from pointing up Hague’s shortcomings during the Libyan conflict to advancing Paddy Ashdown as a suitable candidate for his job. Paddy Ashdown? You mean the narcissistic grandstanding former S.A.S former Liberal leader? How Nick Clegg would welcome that. Comparisons would be inevitable.
I don’t think so. With respect, this suggestion is crazy. Bosnia is the best place for him. As Foreign Secretary, ill conceived, courageous (so long as others do the dirty work) interventions would be forever on the cards. He’d be as popular among his European counterparts as Robin Cook, pontificating from his very own moral high ground.
Think again!
Jacqueline
I think you have persuaded me. I’ve always been impressed by Hague, even though I find his position on the EU inexplicable in such a bright person. However, if Ashdown would do it, his combination of confident frankness and highly relevant experience would add weight to the European effort. Some of our recent efforts have been either effete or too mid-Atlantic.
John Ellis
There is no way that Cameron would make Paddy Foreign Secretary as the whole cabinet, including the PM, would be upstaged.
Jo Huddleston
Foreign policy is dead easy except:
i) “friends” want rewarding with weapons sales, thus heralding the next killing field
ii) oil/gas needs make us permanently whopping liars
iii) US power and wealth have to be courted, so murderous Israel has to be treated as a democracy
iv) EU is a gravy-train teenage lout.
Given that, doesn’t much matter who you chose for Foreign Sec.
John Szemerey
I have had doubts about Hague since he was elected Leader of the Conservative Party on the votes of the Eurosceptics and then proposed concentration camps for immigrants. His ‘scoop’ that Gadaffy had fled the country and was on the way to South America reflects his immature way of handling foreign affairs. As Birrell writes, he is unconvincing.
Let him retire to the backbenches of the House of Commons, as he is a good debater. And let Cameron choose someone more capable and more realistic about Europe to take his place.
But Lord Ashdown? As a life peer he could not give up his peerage, and having a Foreign Secretary in the House of Lords is just not on.
Roland Baker
When T Blair spoke of the “hand of history” at the time of the Good Friday agreement, some thought he meant the “heavyweight of experience” was on his shoulder. Given that the “agreement” was made in 1998, it seems odd that it is not fully complete even in 2011 and terrorism in Northern Ireland is resurgent. This outcome, sadly, is more likely to reflect the heavyweight of experience than the hand of history.
As for Libya, Hague is pursuing a policy in which Cameron has invested significant personal political capital and jointly with President Sarkozy of France at that. Do not expect Cameron to spend any of that capital by sacking Hague (nor Liam Fox) while our forces are engaged in upholding UN Resolution 1973 – unless he is looking to write a book called “How to Bomb a Government in One Easy Lesson”.
Cameron is at the “hand of history stage”. Look at the average age of the key cabinet actors, the PM and DPM. You will see that the heavyweight of experience is in short supply – which is not always a bad thing as it allows new thinking.
Hague is entirely right, as a respected student and writer of historical biography, to learn from arming the Mujahidin in Afghanistan to beat the Russians out of the country. The consequences were discussed after the recent release of 30-year cabinet papers from the time of Thatcher, M. Lord Hurd ducked the question about how much of that ordnance is now being used to kill British Troops.
Absent a Libyan analogy with the Balkans, I am not sure that Paddy Ashdown, his eminence notwithstanding, would be Hague’s obvious successor. Libya is not about territorial aggrandisement as per lebensraum and Serbia.