Britain’s “extremist mainstream”: MidEast ambassadors reveal their true colours
Sometimes it takes a while before the sheer horror of what is going on in one’s own country truly sinks in. How many times have I written here about another “new low” in British attitudes to Israel, the Jews, and Islamist terrorism? How much room, therefore, can there still be for anything sufficiently dreadful to have any shock value? But the revelations last week about the British Foreign Office and two of its ambassadors in the Middle East were so mind bogglingly appalling that I felt it sensible to spend the weekend pondering on what this all meant. Others have written well (indeed brilliantly, see Melanie Phillips here) on the matter already. But, for what it is worth, here is what I have come up with after a couple of days thinking things over.
First the facts of the matter. Last week, Frances Guy, Britain’s ambassador to Lebanon wrote an entry on her official Foreign Office blog mourning the death of Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, the spiritual godfather of the Jew-hating, Hezbollah terror group. She described Fadlallah — the man who blessed (literally) the suicide bombers who killed more than 300 Americans in the 1983 Beirut bomb attack — as “a true man of religion; leaving an impact on everyone he meets, no matter what their faith.” And, she went on to say: “The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints”.
The relatives of the hundreds of people whose arms, legs and heads he had blown off might take a different view of the kind of “impact” Fadlallah has on “everyone he meets, no matter what their faith”. But before we come to the commentary, be aware that there has been more of this sort of thing from the British government’s top representative to Jordan. Here is a selection of recent remarks from Ambassador James Watt:
“No one outside Israel is prepared – or very few – to take Zionist arguments at their face value any longer.” He said the notion that “a Jewish people was building Jerusalem 5,000 years ago” was “completely non-factual”. He described the Arabs as “the indigenous Palestinian population”. He lamented “the arrival of the Zionists in Palestine, with their commitment to avoiding any kind of integration into existing society” which he described as “the origin of the problem.” He wrote of Israeli policies being “progressively more violent” and, “more ready to inflict civilian casualties on a large scale in pursuit of its political goals” and he repeated various pieces of Hamas propaganda about Operation Cast Lead and the Gaza blockade.
I will deal with both of these characters together in a moment. But it is also worth noting a postscript to the scandal (or lack of one) surrounding the remarks by Frances Guy, HMG Ambassador to Lebanon, in particular. Her initial remarks have now been removed from the website — even the Foreign Office has baulked at mourning the death of a man who approved the slaughter of hundreds of Americans, citizens therefore of Britain’s greatest ally. But what has now materialised is a new blog by Guy in which she appears completely unaware of what she has done:
“The problem with diplomatic blogging,” she says, “is that you risk being anodyne or controversial”. No. The problem with diplomatic blogging is that you risk saying what you really think and thus revealing your core beliefs and values. “I have no truck with terrorism wherever it is committed in whoever’s name,” she says.
Ah yes. That’s the official Foreign Office line. But caught without her diplomatic clothes on, her thinking was revealed to be very different, wasn’t it? And even in what is supposed to be an apology, she is still unable to tell the truth about the mass murderer that she had spoken of in such glowing terms: “The blog was my personal attempt to offer some reflections of a figure who while controversial was also highly influential in Lebanon’s history and who offered spiritual guidance to many Muslims in need.” (My italics)
And, she concludes: “I regret any offence caused”. Really? So why didn’t you prove that point by describing Fadlallah as he really was? The truth is that, in the absence of a single word about Fadlallah’s profoundly significant and direct support for terrorism, the only sense in which her statement of regret can be taken seriously is in the sense that she regrets having revealed the underlying thinking of the British Foreign Office about Islamist terror. Thus, even as she offers an apology, she reaffirms her original offence.
But here, and simultaneously bringing in her counterpart in Jordan, we come to the core issue. In the thinking of the British Foreign Office, she (and he) committed no offence at all. A slip of the tongue, perhaps. A faux pas, certainly. But an offence? Not really. Who in the hierarchy of the British Foreign Office really disagrees with either of these two ambassadors’ views on terrorism, Israel and the conflict in the Middle East? These aren’t two rotten apples in an otherwise blemish-free barrel-load. As Mark Steyn is wont to say in such circumstances, quoting the language of the computer techies, this isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.
In other words, this is policy. This is what the British Foreign Office stands for. This what Great Britain Plc does in the world. This, in other words, is the extremist mainstream — a centre-ground in Britain which is now so saturated with hatred for the Jewish state, with sympathy for the “grievances” of the terrorist, with ambivalence about liberal-democratic values themselves that a complete reversal of normality has now been achieved.
Views which should exist only at the far fringes of a healthy democratic society now occupy the mainstream; views which should occupy the mainstream are shunned, demonised and exiled to the fringes.
I sometimes chide people for being too casual with their analogies to the 1930s. But in this case the only sense in which I would disapprove is that the situation in Britain in 2010 is starting to look a good deal worse. For if there is a Churchill waiting in the wings, I really haven’t been able to spot him.
This can only go on for so long before something finally snaps. I don’t know where we are heading. But the future is looking darker by the day.
Tags: Israel
July 12th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
As always, Robin, you’re spot on. There is really nothing more one can say!
July 12th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
I’m reminded of a classic episode of “Yes, Prime Minister,” in which the Foreign Office’s plant in the PM’s office (I mean the Private Secretary for Foreign Affairs), revealed to be anti-Israel, is rewarded by being posted to Jerusalem so he can explain to the Israelis why the British always vote against them at the UN. Maybe that’s the solution here, since no civil servant these days will ever resign as a matter of principle and it is unlikely that the Foreign Office will punish anyone who holds the views shared by all in the Foreign Office.
July 12th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
IN THE LIGHT OF THE NEW/OLD REVELATIONS ABOUT THE NEW/OLD FOREIGN OFFICE,ITS EASY TO UNDERSTAND THE JEWISH/ARAB CONFLICT SINCE 1917.THE FO HAS BEEEN WORKING INCESSANTLY TO DENY THE BALFOUR DECLARATION.EVEN TODAY THY ARE PROBABLY MAKING THEIR BEST TO UNDERMINE THE TWO STATE SOLUTION.
July 12th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
The ambassador to Jordan apparently complained that the Israeli’s “aren’t trying to integrate themselves in the neighborhood.” Considering the views of the British Foreign Office and so many other Europeans, I get the feeling that they are the ones trying to integrate themselves into the Middle East. If they keep this up much longer, they are likely to be successful in this endeavor. I would love to see the looks on their faces when they find themselves praying to Mecca five times a day.
There is a Jewish legend that there are always 36 righteous men whose presence in the world keeps it from being destroyed. For the sake of Europe, I hope that Robin Shepherd represents a similar contingent of fair-minded and reasoning people who will keep it from going under.
July 12th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
The views of Guy and Watt are ignorant and biased and probably do represent attitudes in the wider FCO. However I’m struck by the ‘disconnect’ with Britain’s fighting a war against the Taliban for the past nine years. These are devout Muslims with a medieval attitude to life not dissimilar to Hamas and Hizbullah. So the British army fights them and the FCO sympathises with them. It’s just plain nuts.
July 12th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
My unpublished comment on Ambassador Guy’s “apology” was:
Dear Ambassador –
You imply that Sheikh Fadlallah’s views held in the latter part of his life are different than the hateful views he previously espoused. Yet, Con Coughlin reported this week that “One of Fadlallah’s last acts before he died was to issue a fatwa authorising the use of suicide bomb attacks”.
Is this consistent with what you “discussed often with Sheikh Fadlallah when we met”?
-UK Citizen
P.S. the photo in the Indie on Saturday spoke volumes: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/envoy-to-lebanon-rapped-for-praising-cleric-2023158.html?action=Popup&gallery=no#
July 12th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
“But in this case the only sense in which I would disapprove is that the situation in Britain in 2010 is starting to look a good deal worse. For if there is a Churchill waiting in the wings, I really haven’t been able to spot him.”
But you must see at least the possibility of deliverance from this evil. Otherwise, why would you spend so much of your valuable time dealing with the issue? I assume you do not see yourself as some kind of prophet who issues jeremiads in the knowledge that no real good will come of them. You are far too wise a man for that.
As an aside, even the arrival of a Churchill in 1940 did not prevent the deaths of 60 million people and the virtual destruction of Jewish civilisation in Europe. Then again, the plight of the Jews was an issue that hardly concerned the Allies. I expect that if Western society does eventually decided to fight back, once again it will be in spite of the Jews and not because of them. Even with a Churchill, I think our destruction is fairly inevitable. So, to answer my own question, perhaps you will end up acting the part of the diarist in the Warsaw Ghetto.
July 12th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
My very first reaction: Please, Robin Shepherd send this summary to ALL the relevant people who really do *matter*, think-tank people/expers/policy molders etc., on the right and also in the center in Washington, and possibly Ottawa and Canberra, but also, preferably, Taipei (!), Seoul, Singapore and last, but not lerast – of course! – Jerusalem! All these last four are, should be added, threatened capitals/peoples. Places that Guy and Watt would not understand.
July 12th, 2010 at 9:55 pm
It looks that, sadly, the British Foreign Office underperformed a by-now actually less-than-mediocre fourth rate American news network /CNN/. Way to go FCO, there dwells the honour.
July 12th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
Robin, the genie ” antisemitism ” is out of the bottle and not only are we failing to push it back in, we can’t even find the lid.
The news is just dreadful. Gadaffi is adding to the pressure by sending a flotilla to stir things up. Shoujd be in Gaza by tonight said the Times today.
Yes. Where is the Churchill of our times?
July 12th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
Words fail me. You are right, such lunacy is now mainstream. You would think that Britain and Israel are enemies!
July 13th, 2010 at 6:02 am
I am such a fool. I had always admired Great Britain, referred to myself as an Anglophile, traveled to your country, spent months living there, and was a British History major in college. I have studied the history of your country for more than forty years with pleasure.
It is hard to change the habits of a lifetime. But I feel so disappointed and repelled by what I read that I cannot imagine visiting Britain again. I still import my tea from Britain, but other than that I no longer buy much from there – I just don’t want it. I worry constantly about the safety of my family members who are British. It is all such a waste.
July 13th, 2010 at 8:57 am
I’m surprised these spineless Foreign Office Arabists haven’t erected their own minaret in Whitehall yet.
July 13th, 2010 at 9:53 am
To “regret” saying something offensive is not the same as apologising to the offended party or parties.
One regrets saying or doing something that harms oneself, not necessarily the other.
ie: I regret having ever started smoking, because now it’s harder to give up.
I regret not having worked harder at school and not having gone to university.
These people, like Helen Thomas, only regret having been found out and censured – none of them have apologised, not will they.
——— tear along dotted line ————
Robin, in the third paragraph you mis-spell Jordan – “Jordon” (sic)
Feel free to edit out this correction from my comment :-)
July 13th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
I listened with disbelief to Jim Muir’s (BBC Beirut correspondent) report on Friday night on the World Tonight. He also said that Fadwallah had left extremist views behind him long ago. How deluded of Muir. Fortunately in a subsequent interview, the JC Editor Stephen Pollard pointed out that as IH above mentioned, the Sheikh had just issued a fatwa authorising suicide bombers. Pollard also rightly questioned the undiplomatic behaviour of Guy & Watt – not that the Foreign Office will do anything about it. I have written to William Hague but do not expect to receive a reply.
July 13th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
@ #6 IH: “My unpublished comment on Ambassador Guy’s “apology”…”
Don’t worry, neither were mine (sent to them both). But actually it’s understandable. I would be ashamed to replicate them here in front of the whole world. Hmmm…
July 13th, 2010 at 2:09 pm
when the British foreign office appointed Al Husseini as grand mufti of Jerusalem, in spite of applications from far more qualified moderate Islamic clerics, they opened up a pandora’s box that would prove a blight on the western democracies and would eventually lead to 911 and thousands of terrorist attacks .
they would have opined that the genocidal attacks this terrible man launched would have enabled them to back down from the creation of Israel by claiming Israel was a failed experiment thus cementing their love affair with the Arabs and the lucrative trading thereof.
and the love affair between the Nazi and Arabs has no better testimony than the many thousands of virulent nazis who escaped refuge in arab countries and helped spread the demonization of the Jews with Arabic translations of the protocols and mein kampf at al and gave assistance in the preparation of the wars to annihilate Israel
July 13th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=4&x_outlet=12&x_article=1705
and the BBC of course continues the whitewashing of that terrible man just as the British elites in the FO did so many years ago
July 13th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
Robin. I have just posted the following on Frances Guy’s blog. I recommend that other contributors to your blog consider following suit.
“a true man of religion; leaving an impact on everyone he meets, no matter what their faith.”
“The world needs more men like him willing to reach out across faiths, acknowledging the reality of the modern world and daring to confront old constraints”
I have sent these comments of yours about Sayid Fadlallah, a mass murderer responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Americans, to all my American relatives and friends for them to forward, so that people in the United States know the views those chosen to represent Britain.
July 13th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
I get the feeling that this will develop into a diplomatic “incident”. It bloody well should. I was furious when I read Watt’s comments. Can you imagine if an Israeli ambassador to a foreign country blogged about Britain in a similar manner?
I wonder if this is a Nu-Labour legacy. William Hague has his work cut out sorting this mess out.
Anyway, I’ve written to the FO expressing my alarm and disapproval, others please do the same:
Foreign & Commonwealth Office,
King Charles Street,
London.
SW1A 2AH
July 13th, 2010 at 3:06 pm
La Cumparsita: In my own experience you probably will get a reply but it’ll be a stock reply which won’t address your concerns. It’ll go on about how the UK Foreign Office is committed to peace in the Middle East and supports a two state solution, blah blah blah.
July 13th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
See Ambassador Watt’s recent dig at Israel:
http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/roller/watt/entry/where_does_this_all_fit
“It is as if the only thing that matters is Israel’s ability to use force …”
Unbelievable.
July 13th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
Another Joshua #10,
Just slightly off topic, but did you know that Obama gave some $400,000 to “Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation”
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/kirk.gadhafi.charities.2.1205623.html
which is sponsoring the Libyan ship to break the Gaza “blockade”.
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=180974&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Activists aboard the Libyan commissioned aid ship the Almathea are still intending on sailing directly to Gaza despite Israeli warnings not do so, said MK Ahmed Tibi (Ta’al) in an interview with Army Radio on Sunday. Tibi has been in contact with the organization sending the ship, the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation.
July 13th, 2010 at 10:00 pm
“Where is the Churchill of our times?”
He’s wearing a skirt and blogging at the Spectator.
July 14th, 2010 at 10:54 am
Robin this is excellent and insightful as ever.
But haven’t UK Ambassadors to the Middle East always barely concealed their animus towards Israel? What is different is that they now feel more free to expose it either because they have lost all contact with what is appropriate in their roles, or because of the facilitating environment which obtains now for Israel-/ Jew-bashing.
July 14th, 2010 at 11:10 am
When I suggested that many Europeans seem to be trying to integrate into the Middle East, I was thinking of their embarrassing efforts to ingratiate themselves with those who despise them. It since occurred to me that there’s much more to it. There is in fact an affinity between the cultures of the Middle East and the far left. They both operate completely on emotion, vilifying whoever is out of favor at the moment and ignoring facts to counter all argument with ad hominem attacks. This is a marriage made in heaven.
July 14th, 2010 at 12:04 pm
This kind of grandstanding is utterly deplorable. We all have right to our opinions but if ambassadors wish to enter the public arena let them do so openly and not at the taxpayers’ expense.This would be utterly wrong even in a quiet backwater but in such a sensitive area as the Middle East it is positively dangerous.
July 14th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Prezelber: Thank you for the link to ambassador Watt’s blog. I posted a furious comment pointing out his ignorance and bias but it has not appeared. Funny that.
July 14th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
@ NicoleS I also tried to post something on Mr Watt’s blog yesterday, but it is yet to appear.
What is depressing is that this mainstream way of thinking is now almost everywhere. Honest Reporting have posted an article about a story appearing in the Lancet which has a circulation of 1.8 million people…
http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Israel_Skewered_by_Medical_Journal.asp
July 14th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Great reporting and analysis, Robin. Let’s keep the British Foreign Office under scrutiny. Expose all the malefactors.
July 15th, 2010 at 9:52 am
Excellent analysis as usual Mr Shepherd – thoroughly depressing though it is.
I have registered my protest on Ambassador Guy’s blogsite but unsurprisingly it hasn’t been published.
Having been aware for some time how through and through Arabist the FCO is, I’m rather resigned to these kinds of views. What I find dispiriting however is that I had nursed a slim hope that with Hague at the helm, the worst excesses would be reined in. Instead he’s proven to be one of the worst disappointments of the coalition government.
It’s now clear that with Blair having departed the political scene, all three major parties now appear to have thrown objectivity, fact and reason overboard with regard to the Middle East and the Arab/Israeli conflict.
July 16th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
I posted the following on Frances Guy’s blog. It did not appear:
Hizbollah is an Iranian proxy dedicated to the destruction of Israel and to the murder of all Jews, be they in Israel or elsewhere. Its leader, Hassan Nazrullah has made this position crystal clear. Anyone associated with Hizbollah or giving comfort to it deserves outright condemnation, be they within the British Government or elsewhere. Lebanon needs the “spiritual guidance” of Fadlallah and his ilk like Germany needed that of Eichmann.
Be not deceived by the blandishments of such men, the mask of Janus fits such men like a glove. They are as likely to eschew violence as Hitler, regardless of what they may say to the faces of bien pensant British officials, as Chamberlain found out to his, and our cost.
Keep up the good work, Robin. Not all of us in Britain are fooled by the multicultural narrative.
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:19 am
So Ambassador James Watt said that no one believes anymore that there was a Jewish presence in ancient times in present day Israel. Here they go again – history is whatever the “in” group wants to promote at any given time. So whenever ancient remains testifying to Jewish presence in the area are uncovered, that’s because the archeologists have an agenda. If not, presumably they would only find evidence of Arab civilizations. But of course, when evidence of Arab culture are found, that’s because they’re really there. With modern civilizations ever greater dependence on science, and therefore on deductive reasoning, I can’t help wondering how long a culture taken over by total irrationality can survive.