Week 17 2014

Tendring Topics…….on line

‘Treat other people as you would like them to treat you!’

            A couple of weeks ago I commented in this blog that this commandment, that Jesus said summed up the whole of the moral teaching of the Old Testament, applies as much to the affairs of nations as it does to those of individual men and women.  I have often regretted that he didn’t add its corollary (perhaps he thought it was so obvious that there was no need to spell it out) ‘Do not do to others what you would hate them to do to you’.   My comment came in connection with the current crisis in the Ukraine and the Crimea.  It seems to me important that both sides involved in this matter should ask themselves how they would feel and what they would do if they were in the situation in which their opponents find themselves.  If both did that, I think there might be a chance of their coming to a compromise acceptable by both sides.  

            A lot has happened in the past fortnight.  Crimea has been ‘annexed’ by Russia.   I have heard no reports of protests from the inhabitants at their change of nationality; no reports of Crimean citizens seeking political asylum in ‘freedom loving’ Ukraine, or begging NATO to free them from the Russians. Surely most people in ‘the west’ now accept that annexation as a fact even if they continue to claim it was ‘illegal’.  It was, no doubt, this that has encouraged the mostly Russian-oriented residents of East Ukraine to assert themselves, raising Russian flags and seizing police stations and government buildings. Probably some of them would like to become Russian citizens.  It seems though that many, perhaps a majority, would prefer to remain an autonomous region of Ukraine but retain the right to have Russian as the region’s ‘first’ language and to conduct their own economic relationship with their Russian neighbour.  Surely this offers ground for a compromise that would involve no bloodshed and could be accepted by both sides without 'losing face’.

            The Foreign Ministers of NATO and of Russia and of the Ukraine are to meet shortly, but the meeting will be fruitless unless both sides are genuinely seeking peace.  Our Foreign Minister William Hague has told the world that he is quite certain that the present unrest in eastern Ukraine has been created and orchestrated by Russia. It is surely much more probable that Russia has simply exploited a situation that already existed.  Their efforts would have been in vain had they not known that a substantial majority of Eastern Ukrainians regarded themselves as being treated  as second class citizens, and would welcome any support that Russia could offer them.  I am equally sure that NATO would have been helpless to support (as I am certain they did) the demonstrators and rioters in the cities of Western Ukraine had they not known that a substantial majority of Western Ukrainians wanted to get rid of their pro-Russian President.

            Has anyone else noted the sinister similarities between the situation in Europe today and the one that existed just a century ago in the summer of 1914?   Bosnia-Herzegovina was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.  The ethnic Serb Bosnians deeply resented this, and one of their number – Gabriel Prinzip – assassinated the Austrian Grand-Duke Ferdinand and his wife while they were on an official visit to Sarajevo

            The Austrian Government was quite sure that the Serbian Government was responsible for this outrage (just as certain, I am sure, as William Hague is, of Russian responsibility for Eastern Ukrainian unrest today).   They presented the Serbs with a humiliating ultimatum that would have effectively robbed them of their independence. Surprisingly perhaps, the Serbs agreed to comply with every point but one of the ultimatum – but that one was sufficient for Austria to declare war on Serbia.

 Serbia had a powerful ally in Tsarist Russia, and the Austro-Hungarian Empire had a powerful ally in Germany. Russia had a powerful ally in France.  France had a powerful (but perhaps a little hesitant) ally in Great Britain and, of course, Britain had its world-wide Empire. Immediately the Austro-Hungarian Empire declared war in Serbia, Russia declared war on Austria-Hungary.  Then, like falling dominoes, Germany declared war on Russia, France declared war on Germany and, last of all, and only after the Germans had attacked France through Belgium whose neutrality had been guaranteed a century earlier, Great Britain declared war on German. The British Empire obediently followed its leader ……. and the senseless slaughter of ‘The Great War’ began.

            World War I could have been avoided had the governments concerned had the sense to meet together in a spirit of compromise, genuinely seeking a just peace rather than national advantage, before all those alliances were activated.

             It may be thought that the current situation is quite different.  There’s no thought of war – yet, and in any case, both Russia and NATO possess nuclear weapons ‘the ultimate deterrent’.  Surely no-one would be stupid and arrogant enough to start a world war with the nuclear threat hanging over all our heads.

            In June 1914 there was no thought of war either, except perhaps in the minds of a few power-hungry rulers.   There was no ‘ultimate deterrent’ in those days, but had anyone had the least inkling that that the assassination in Sarajevo would trigger a world-war resulting in over Sixteen Million (armed forces and civilians) dead, I am quite sure that a compromise would have been found.  God forbid that there should be any thought of war today – but if there were to be an armed conflict, we shouldn’t imagine that those ‘ultimate deterrents’ would actually deter either side.  They haven’t deterred any act of aggression yet!  Both sides might well decide to be the first with a pre-emptive nuclear strike that – they would probably delude themselves – would make ‘the other side’ see reason!  

Later News

          The meeting of Foreign Ministers appears to have been much more useful than I (or the Foreign Ministers themselves!) expected.  The pro-Russian protesters are to lay down their arms and vacate the Ukrainian government buildings and other property and an amnesty is offered them.   The Ukrainian provisional Government has promised to grant autonomy to the eastern region retaining only defence and foreign policy over the whole country.

            The US and UK foreign ministers have voiced cautious optimism about the final outcome while threatening further ‘consequences’ for Russia if the pro-Russian protesters do not fulfil their side of the agreement.  The only people who weren't represented at the Geneva talks were the pro-Russian protesters!  How extraordinary that the people most concerned weren't represented while the USA, on the other side of the world and with no possible national interest in the Ukraine, dominated the proceedings!

            The agreement was reasonable enough – if the Russian Government does control those protesters or can exert sufficient pressure on them to persuade them to comply with it.  I am by no means sure of either.  I recall that a similar ‘reasonable’ compromise was agreed to end the mirror-image demonstrations and protests in Kiev and other cities in western Ukraine that began this whole crisis.  The protesters ignored the agreement and carried on with their by-then violent protests until they had obtained all their objectives and had formed a new government with a new ‘interim’ President. I am still cautiously optimistic as I write these words (on Good Friday).  I may need to alter them before I post this blog on Easter Monday!

            Well, Easter Monday is here.   Some of the militant pro-Russian activists are refusing to disarm and leave the buildings they have occupied. True to form, William Hague tells us that Russia will face dire consequences.  Penalising the Russian government for the stubbornness of the pro-Russian activists is directly comparable with, and would be just as daft as, penalising the Irish Government for the activities of dissident republican groups in Ulster!

‘Blessed are the Peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.’

Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom ……….

          ……the Trussell Trust, to which most food banks are affiliated, has declared that during the past financial year 913,000 people required emergency food parcels for at least three days.  This is an increase of 163 percent over its figure of 347,000 during the previous twelve months. It was also reported that 83 percent of its food banks had reported that government benefits sanctions were driving people to seek food aid.

            The Church Times reports that the publication of these figures coincides with the sending of an open letter signed by 42 Anglican bishops and 600 other clergy and ministers of other Christian traditions, to David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband asking them to work with the parliamentary inquiry into food poverty launched two weeks ago, and to implement its recommendations.

            The letter says, As we approach Easter the mind turns to the hope of spring, the promise of resurrection and renewal.  Hope drives us to act.  It drives us to tackle the growing hunger in our midst.  It calls on each of us, and the government too, to act to make sure that work pays, that food markets support sustainable and healthy diets, and that the welfare system provides a last line of defence against hunger.

            Among the signatories were the Archbishop of Wales, Dr Barry Morgan, nineteen other diocesan bishops and representatives of other denominations, including the Roman Catholic, Methodist, Baptist and United Reformed Churches.

            I very much hope that a representative of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) was also among the signatories.

         

           

Week 44 2013

Tendring Topics……..on Line

Our Grandchildren’s Legacy

            One of the most persuasive arguments that the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer use to justify their continuing assault on the finances of the poor and disabled and the services on which they depend, is that it would be grossly unfair of us to leave our grandchildren with a legacy of our debts that we have been too selfish to clear.  It’s a persuasive argument. None of us wants to be the cause of suffering or hardship to our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.   I doubt though if it has  satisfied those whose car has been damaged by a pothole in the road, who have tripped over a broken paving stone or who have found that they are no longer eligible for a financial benefit needed to keep their family warm and above starvation-level.  Our top politicians are also – or so I thought – quite keen on supporting British industry that will provide jobs for British workers and thus make up for some of the unemployment resulting from their cuts in the public services.

            That being so, I find it difficult to understand why they are quite so enthusiastic about a new nuclear power station that is to be built, at the cost of billions of pounds, by a French enterprise and financed by the Chinese!   It will, announced the Prime Minister, provide thousands of jobs and cost the British taxpayer nothing at all.  And that, he added with self-satisfaction, ‘must be a good thing’.

            The Chinese aren’t philanthropists and they are lending that money for the power plant’s construction just as surely as the financial institutions lend money to the government to allow it to carry out its functions.  They’ll want it back – with interest!  It may not cost us anything now as tax-payers but it certainly will cost our grandchildren and great-grandchildren as consumers.  Luckily for the government they won’t have votes in the next General Election!  The government has promised repayment by means  of electricity charges to domestic, commercial and industrial consumers at twice the rate at which those consumers are charged today – and goodness knows, many people, and many firms, are finding today’s prices crippling.  It’s true that some of that increase will be absorbed by general inflation by the time that power station is producing electricity – but wages and incomes (except for those of the very wealthy) aren’t keeping up with inflation now.  Why should we assume they’ll do so in the future?

            Debt will not, of course, be the only legacy left to our grandchildren and great grandchildren by this and other nuclear power stations.   The production of nuclear power leaves a toxic residue that remains lethal for hundreds of years and for which no-one has yet discovered a safe means of disposal or storage.

            I wrote fairly light-heartedly in this blog about ‘fracking’ a few weeks ago.  The real objection to its practice is not that it will despoil the countryside and possibly pollute water supplies but that it will encourage complacency in the face of the strongest evidence yet that accelerating climate change is taking place and that human activity is responsible for it.  Fracking, as well as being expensive and destroying the beauty of ‘England’s green and pleasant land’, produces fossil fuels that will hasten that climate change and delay our development of sufficient clean and renewable sources of energy sufficient to meet the UK’s needs.

           

            Nuclear power doesn’t produce greenhouse gases but it does have bulky by-products that remain lethal for centuries.  Nuclear power plants are also subject to damage by natural disasters, as we have seen recently in Japan where radio-active material from a ruined nuclear energy installation continues to pollute the Pacific Ocean.  Had anyone warned of that Japanese power plant’s potential vulnerability four years ago they would have been laughed at, just as those who in Britain warn about vulnerability to natural disaster and to terrorist action, are laughed at today.

            We need to press on with our harnessing of the power of the wind and the sun.  We need also to find effective ways of exploiting the power of the waves that crash onto our beaches and the foot of our cliffs all the year round.  The potential energy of wind, sun and waves does, as critics delight in pointing out, vary according to the weather and the season.    That of the tides that ebb and flow twice daily round our coasts and into and out of our estuaries is completely dependable.  Tidal power doesn’t pollute, needn’t deface the landscape and doesn’t produce a lethal by-product.  It has been harnessed and used in tide-mills for centuries. We need to use 21^st century technology to exploit for modern use this totally reliable, non-polluting and inexhaustible source of energy.

I have little doubt that if we invested half as much capital and effort into researching and developing those entirely benign and renewable sources of energy as we spend on manufacturing weapons of death and destruction, our grandchildren would have all the energy they needed, in safety and at prices they would be able to afford.

Late News - David Cameron has announced that he will 'roll back' the green taxes introduced to combat  climate change as they add too much to fuel bills.  Well, it's easier than confronting the energy supply companies and it should win a few votes for his Party.  Tough on those grandchildren and great grandchildren about whom he and the Chancellor were once so concerned.

A Prophecy Fulfilled!

How very rarely does the ability to say ‘I told you so!’ give the speaker any satisfaction whatsoever!

It must surely be obvious to any sane person that this dreadful civil war in Syria must be stopped. Thousands of innocent people have been killed.  Thousands more have been rendered homeless.  Much of the country has been reduced to ruin. The flood of refugees is overwhelming neighbouring countries.  Egypt and Libya, Muslim countries that might have been expected to welcome their fugitive co-religionists are simply moving then on – many to their deaths as they try to cross the Mediterranean Sea in cockle-shell boats. The religious tolerance that was once a hallmark of the Syrian regime has been replaced by sectarian strife, intolerance and persecution of people of minority religious traditions. Christians, who before the civil war had lived in peace beside their Muslim neighbours have been particularly targeted by the very rebels whom our government is supporting. 

 Backing either one side or the other in an attempt to force an end to conflict by bringing one of the combatants to victory is as stupid as it is wicked!  The fact is that both sides have shown total contempt for human life. Both sides are culpable.   The only possible end to the conflict must surely lie in negotiations in which all concerned are prepared to compromise to restore the country to peace and allow Syrians – free from any foreign interference – to heal their wounds, bury their dead and rebuild their shattered country.

Just such an international conference has been planned for next month.  I prophesied in this blog that I thought it likely that Russia would be able to persuade the Syrian Government to attend in a spirit of compromise.  Our government's ability to persuade the rebels (a hotchpotch of liberal idealists, fanatical Muslim jihadists and known democracy-hating terrorists, many of them foreigners with no previous   association whatsoever with Syria) to send representatives ready to compromise and authorised to negotiate, would be another matter!

So it has proved.  The Syrian Government is prepared to attend the international conference with no preconditions.  By promising that President Assad would play no part in any future Syrian Government (I'd have thought that that was a decision that the Syrian people might have been allowed to decide in the ballot box?) our Foreign Secretary William Hague has persuaded some of the rebels to send representatives.  Others though, notably members and supporters of Al Qaida, are interested only in total victory no matter how many innocents are slaughtered to achieve it. If, miraculously, a compromise is reached and a new peaceful Syria emerges, I have little doubt that supporters of Al Qaida will continue their war of terrorism to try to undermine and destroy it.

Just one good thing does appear to be emerging from this appalling conflict.  The Head of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, recently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, believes that the surrender and destruction of Syria’s stock-pile of chemical weapons will mean that the organisation’s objective;  a world free of these terrible means of killing fellow human beings, can and will be achieved in his lifetime.

If that is possible – then why should it not be possible to make progress towards achieving a world free of those even-more-terrible nuclear weapons?  At the moment we in the UK live in one of seven countries (but officially only six!) that possess these dreadful weapons of mass destruction. Do we really imagine that the citizens of for instance, Canada, Germany, Sweden and Japan sleep any less easily in their beds than we do because they don’t possess these so-called ultimate deterrents?  I hope, again for the sake of our grandchildren and great grandchildren, that it doesn’t take their use in some future conflict to persuade the world’s governments of the importance and urgency of banishing them for ever from our planet.

  Is the UK betraying Europe – for the CIA?         

The UK Government's deafening silence amid a chorus of indignation about the bugging of the phones of European leaders, while David Cameron reserves his condemnation for those who have revealed this practice, gives credence to the accusation that Britain's GCHQ has been assisting in the CIA's clandestine activities.  Imagine the outrage there would be if it were revealed that agents from 'Brussels' were listening in to the private conversations of David Cameron, George Osborne and William Hague!  How do we know that the CIA isn’t doing just that?  ‘We’ve been given assurances……. I’ve no doubt that if Angela Merkel had enquired six months ago, she’d have been given the same assurances.  There’s no honour among thieves or among spies  and not very much it seems, among politicians!

 .  

.