Many a chip between cup and lip

+Today I’m looking at Labour’s manifesto to see what it says about foreign policy and defence. Will this be a weak point, given Starmer’s worse than hopeless stance on issues like Gaza, and his abject, unquestioning obeisance to the Atlanticist dogma? It seems that come what may, Labour is determined to spend 2.5% of GDP (a meaningless figure) on defence—merely to match the Tories’ pledge. At the same time, Labour is committed to having a strategic defence review, so it seems the money is to be found before we even know what it’s to be spent on, excepting, of course the nuclear ‘deterrent’ which Starmer has pledged to use. So that’ll take up a good slice of the 2.5% What’s the point of having a defence review? It’s just an excuse to kick the can down the road. What, after all, would be the outcome if the review found that our army was 50% understaffed and maybe needed a 25% pay upgrade to boost recruitment? Nothing much, guaranteed. What would happen to the grip the defence industry has on the MoD, with their inflated estimates and cost overruns? I say put a former RAF supplier accountant (me) in charge and root out the cosy relationships which I doubt any Labour defence minister will dare tackle, as they credulously soak in the executive wisdom of one of our greatest exporters, BAE Systems (and make no mistake, defence manufacturing will play an important part in Labour’s  manufacturing growth agenda). So I would dare to suggest that in the field of defence, Labour represents no change whatsoever. Our rundown armed forces (as opposed to Trident) will continue to deteriorate.

Labour’s foreign policy can be summed up as ‘my friends right or wrong.’But in the context of the Palestinian struggle, ameliorative words have to be spoken to try to stem the flow of support for pro-Palestinian candidates in the election. Thus the manifesto says:

‘Long-term peace and security in the Middle East will be an immediate focus. Labour will continue to push for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages, the upholding of international law, and a rapid increase of aid into Gaza. Palestinian statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people. It is not in the gift of any neighbour and is also essential to the long-term security of Israel. We are committed to recognising a Palestinian state as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.’

A ’viable Palestinian state?’ This could only mean (if sincere) the removal of all illegal settlements on the West Bank and a return to the 1967 borders—something which the Zionists will not accept in a million years. Nor is it actually clear whether a Labour government would recognise Palestine immediately or tie it into some ongoing ’peace process.’ Which comes first? Given Israel’s recent condemnation of e.g. Norway and Ireland for recognising Palestinian statehood I really can’t see Starmer breaking away from his Zionist supporters to follow suit. Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy talks about ’progressive pragmatism’ or some such twaddle. This amounts to nothing more than ’we won’t step out of line’ or what one might call the Bilderberg Consensus.
​
+Putin’s visit to North Korea ended with an exchange of gifts. Putin received a tea set and Kim Jong-un was given a Russian luxury limo. As I write the limo will be stripped down as the search for bugs proceeds. And maybe the tea set will be chipped too, so to speak.