We are now entering the seventh day of this latest international crisis, sparked when British boarding crews checking vessels for arms smuggling were captured at gunpoint by Iranian Revolutionary Guards. All this took place out of sight of British helicopters and support ships in the territorially contentious Shatt al-Arab waterway between Iran and Iraq.
What are we to make of this? Playground bully tactics or a logical fightback to building pressure in the region? What can the UK do other than puff itself up like a cockerel and express moral bird-rage?
Let us first look at Iran. An outed member of Bush's 'axis of evil' club, the country has of late been involved in allegations of arms smuggling to shia militias operating against coalition forces in Iraq. Around 90% of Iran's population belong to the shia branch of Islam; diplomatic relations with the US and UK have been tough in the past half century to say the least (think Iranian embassy siege in London 1980, Rushdie's fatwa and subsequent cutting of diplomatic relations, the rejection of David Reddaway as British Ambassador to Iran etc, etc). Now a cursory glance at the map will reveal that Iran at this particular point in time finds itself sandwiched between Iraq on the one side, it's regime toppled and US military everywhere, and Afghanistan on the other, it's regime toppled and US military everywhere. It would not be too unreasonable to imagine that the Iranians see a threatening pattern emerging. Two new US aircraft carrier fleets have arrived in the Gulf this week, and Iran alleges members of it's elite Revolutionary Guard are currently being held by American forces in Iraq.
Military doctrine as professed by Iran involves defence of national territory only. The Shatt al Arab waterway has been contested for years between Iran and it's erstwhile sovereign neighbour, Iraq. Commentators have pointed out that it is possible to go back to Ottoman times to see the first signs of disagreement over the floating border. Treaties have been made and abrogated since the 1700s. Anyone interested in the tos and fros can research that historical aspect independently, however the point remains it is hard to prove the British sailors were not in contested waters known to be territorially hazy.
And what a lovely target the British! Overstretched militarily, losing heart and control as part of the coalition in Iraq, a smaller, weaker nation than the USA. Iran calculates big brother can ill avoid confrontation at present time and so is springing its trap with perfect timing: Blair on his way, Bush on the back foot, think again West!
Inevitably a large part of the British population will call for pride to be defended, honour restored and ultimatums evocative of 1939... Politicians knowing this, and knowing how impossible conflict with Iran could be are left, well without a paddle, or even a patrol boat.
Friday, 30 March 2007
Wednesday, 14 March 2007
the road to war
By all accounts Commodore Matthew Perry was a man of his time: forceful, expedient and with little flexibility when it came to the interests of the United States. Having somewhat insulted the Okinawans with his imperiousness and demands for trading rights, Perry's 'Black Ships' arrived in Uraga harbour near modern-day Tokyo in 1852. The Japanese, having narrowly avoided a naval bombardment by Perry's fleet, agreed to terms of trade. Thus the next chapter in Japan's history saw the rush to industrialisation and modernisation. In short Japan, having witnessed the awesome power of the western nations, set itself the goal of becoming a world power with the means to hold its own in a world of strength and empire.
Great Britain in particular forged a strong partnership with the new Japan and, as William Adams before them, envoys to the country were full of admiration for the native sense of order, progress, efficiency and reliability. Perhaps in the Japanese the British saw themselves, an island nation of long traditions, strength of character, a dominating force and indomitable spirit.
Japanese aspirations grew in measure with the changing situation and, reminded of the ever present threat of foreign intervention after war with Russia in the first part of the twentieth century, a small militant nationalist minority began influencing decisions. Japan, so poor in oil and rubber began to look abroad for possible sources of sustenance. Foolhardy western nations refused to sign a clause of 'racial equality' within the League of Nations in the 1920s thus fuelling popular speculation that Japan was seen as yet another inferior 'yellow' people by a majority of world powers.
The 1930s set precedents for the emerging empire in terms of aggression, expansion and brutality. Military officers, gaining in confidence over their civilian masters, contrived the conflict of Manchuria that led to the infamous 'rape of Nanking' in which some 400,000 were executed or otherwise murdered.
Holding the border against Russian encroachment and providing resources for the homeland, Manchuria became vital to Japan's interests. For the United States however, Japans' growing strength became a cause for serious concern. The United States decided to exert some pressure on Japan by reconsidering supplies of exports including oil, so vital for the engine of growth.
What was proud, fierce Japan to do? Yield to American pressure and become weakened?Allow the Russians to contemplate revenge for honour and recovery of territory? Suffer the intolerable loss of face? Or strike to seize valued resources, defend national pride and neutralise threats?
Great Britain in particular forged a strong partnership with the new Japan and, as William Adams before them, envoys to the country were full of admiration for the native sense of order, progress, efficiency and reliability. Perhaps in the Japanese the British saw themselves, an island nation of long traditions, strength of character, a dominating force and indomitable spirit.
Japanese aspirations grew in measure with the changing situation and, reminded of the ever present threat of foreign intervention after war with Russia in the first part of the twentieth century, a small militant nationalist minority began influencing decisions. Japan, so poor in oil and rubber began to look abroad for possible sources of sustenance. Foolhardy western nations refused to sign a clause of 'racial equality' within the League of Nations in the 1920s thus fuelling popular speculation that Japan was seen as yet another inferior 'yellow' people by a majority of world powers.
The 1930s set precedents for the emerging empire in terms of aggression, expansion and brutality. Military officers, gaining in confidence over their civilian masters, contrived the conflict of Manchuria that led to the infamous 'rape of Nanking' in which some 400,000 were executed or otherwise murdered.
Holding the border against Russian encroachment and providing resources for the homeland, Manchuria became vital to Japan's interests. For the United States however, Japans' growing strength became a cause for serious concern. The United States decided to exert some pressure on Japan by reconsidering supplies of exports including oil, so vital for the engine of growth.
What was proud, fierce Japan to do? Yield to American pressure and become weakened?Allow the Russians to contemplate revenge for honour and recovery of territory? Suffer the intolerable loss of face? Or strike to seize valued resources, defend national pride and neutralise threats?
Thursday, 8 March 2007
executing with grace
At certain points in our lives we come face to face with an unknown person upon whom we rely totally for our wellbeing. This person may care about us or not. A fact of life is that on these occasions when death is close we want to feel safe, to feel we will be taken care of.
Timothy Spall's portrayal of Albert Pierrepoint, Britain's most prolific hangman, in the film bearing his name deserves rich recognition. The film is a very British one and wonderfully evocative of the generation before, a time when people coped more discreetly and did their business with dignity. A cause to be proud for the film makers and actors.
Albert Pierrepoint lived into old age and died in a nursing home in 1992. In his autobiography in 1974 he said this about his work:
"I have come to the conclusion that executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the responsibility for revenge to other people...The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off."
Timothy Spall's portrayal of Albert Pierrepoint, Britain's most prolific hangman, in the film bearing his name deserves rich recognition. The film is a very British one and wonderfully evocative of the generation before, a time when people coped more discreetly and did their business with dignity. A cause to be proud for the film makers and actors.
Albert Pierrepoint lived into old age and died in a nursing home in 1992. In his autobiography in 1974 he said this about his work:
"I have come to the conclusion that executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the responsibility for revenge to other people...The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off."
Tuesday, 6 March 2007
from the ashes the sun rises...
One of the nations fast rising up my List of Respect is Japan. What a fantastic people, a truly dynamic, hardy and determined race. The only nation to be atom bombed. Japan, synonymous with innovation, design, 'just-in-time' theories of mass production (first developed by Ford of the United States but seized upon and adopted by the emerging Phoenix of Japan in the 1950s). At the risk of sounding old-fashioned and stereotypical Japanese values through the ages have meant stoicism, patience, community, respect, dedication, appreciation of the natural state of order and dare we say it, honour.
Recently I have been wrestling with Alex Kerr's Dogs and Demons: The Downfall of Modern Japan. It is an angry book dealing in part with the idea that in its unrelenting economic drive forward the nation has sacrificed many formerly cherished ideals and aspects of the native culture. Another shadow cast over my optimism came from an elderly former Vice President of a certain Mazda plant who expressed his belief that Japan was on the way down due to the lack of motivation amongst contemporary young people. Having never seen hardship, having been born into times of plenty they were lazy said he. He struck me as a man of sound judgement, and long experience having been both a university professor and responsible for thousands of employees in his company days. So have I got it wrong about Japan?
Japan first experimented with foreign flavours of the western variety from the sixteenth century onwards, most notably in the form of Portuguese and Dutch sailors and missionaries. There is of course the wonderful story from that period of the Englishman William Adams who, arriving in Japan shipwrecked and half dead, survived execution, learned the language, became counselor to the Shogun, was granted lands and eventually obtained samurai status. The embodiment of 'going native'! The 1600s saw rivalry in Japan between Dutch, Portuguese and English trade interests and a widespread effort by our old friends the Jesuits to convert every man and his dog. The Japanese regarded these first curious gaijin (outsiders) with a mixture of bemusement and wariness. However, as the extent of the ambition of the European powers and the cult of Catholicism became increasingly apparent to successive shoguns, Japan moved towards a form of isolationism. The sakoku (''closed country'') period would last for the next two and a half centuries with foreigners excluded by law until the fellow who first planted the first US flag on Key West in 1822 made his entrance. He wanted to speak to the Japanese. About trade.
Recently I have been wrestling with Alex Kerr's Dogs and Demons: The Downfall of Modern Japan. It is an angry book dealing in part with the idea that in its unrelenting economic drive forward the nation has sacrificed many formerly cherished ideals and aspects of the native culture. Another shadow cast over my optimism came from an elderly former Vice President of a certain Mazda plant who expressed his belief that Japan was on the way down due to the lack of motivation amongst contemporary young people. Having never seen hardship, having been born into times of plenty they were lazy said he. He struck me as a man of sound judgement, and long experience having been both a university professor and responsible for thousands of employees in his company days. So have I got it wrong about Japan?
Japan first experimented with foreign flavours of the western variety from the sixteenth century onwards, most notably in the form of Portuguese and Dutch sailors and missionaries. There is of course the wonderful story from that period of the Englishman William Adams who, arriving in Japan shipwrecked and half dead, survived execution, learned the language, became counselor to the Shogun, was granted lands and eventually obtained samurai status. The embodiment of 'going native'! The 1600s saw rivalry in Japan between Dutch, Portuguese and English trade interests and a widespread effort by our old friends the Jesuits to convert every man and his dog. The Japanese regarded these first curious gaijin (outsiders) with a mixture of bemusement and wariness. However, as the extent of the ambition of the European powers and the cult of Catholicism became increasingly apparent to successive shoguns, Japan moved towards a form of isolationism. The sakoku (''closed country'') period would last for the next two and a half centuries with foreigners excluded by law until the fellow who first planted the first US flag on Key West in 1822 made his entrance. He wanted to speak to the Japanese. About trade.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)