David Cameron: man of steel or bloody idiot?

[Fodder76]

or somewhere in between?

Given his rather candid opinions on the foreign affairs front in recent weeks do you think his departure from the norm of understated language is inspired or foolish?

For what its worth I find it refreshing but I have my doubts as to whether its going to have a positive effect either on our standing internationally or on the situations that he addresses.

[copenhagen]

Originally Posted by Fodder76

or somewhere in between?

Given his rather candid opinions on the foreign affairs front in recent weeks do you think his departure from the norm of understated language is inspired or foolish?

For what its worth I find it refreshing but I have my doubts as to whether its going to have a positive effect either on our standing internationally or on the situations that he addresses.

Im not sure myself yet. Are you talking about Israel and Pakistan?

[Gooner]

Has he asked Washington first though?

That is our foreign policy these days.

[Fodder76]

Well now there's a thought. Perhaps part of the role of "junior partner" in the "special relationship" is to say all the things the US wants to say but can't for fear of upsetting apple-carts?

Funny how comfortable these tinfoil hats are.

[Fodder76]

Right! Lunchtime so I can be a bit more expansive.

With reference to the comments he made about Pakistan looking both ways, I personally think he's made a serious blunder there. He's right, no doubt about that, but when you consider the political landscape within Pakistan today it surely can't be helpful. There have been enough rumours and whispered suggestions that the ISI have been backing the Taliban to believe that there's a kernal of truth there at least. There is a large and vocal fundamentalist movement who are opposed to links with the US and UK. There is a large proportion of the country who support the Taliban in very real terms. The Pakistani army has been engaged in operatons against Pakistanis in the border regions. The Pakistani government doesn't have the popular support to root out all of these elements of society as Cameron seems to be suggesting.

If he was hoping to put pressure on the Pakistani government to up their game in terms of internal security surely he would have been better served doing so on a face to face basis. All he has done is give the government's opponents ammunition, look at all we have done for the West and this is how they thank us kind of thing. Don't forget how much internal resistance Musharaf had to over come in the first place.

Whats more worrying though is that apparently his scripted speech was very carefully worded, it was when he went "off piste" during the Q&A afterword that he made the comments. Do we have a PM who can't even keep himself "on message" and has that trait undermined one of our most important partners in the region?

[Gooner]

The bottom line is that Pakistan better sort its own house out.

The consequences of them not doing so could be unimagineably grave.

[Fodder76]

Indeed, the question is however whether Camerons interjection has made that more or less likely?

[Listy]

I think it has improved relations with India, which considering they're going to be top dogs soon, is not a bad thing.

[Andy H]

Though the jury is out on this candid veracity type of policy, I think on the whole its a positive step. I suppose one could hope that by being so overt, he is asking those in the firing line to be equally overt in their response.

However the real test is when somebody responds with equal force of words to what Cameron is using.

Its always easier to ask a specific question than give a specifc answer.

Regards

Andy H

[Fodder76]

Originally Posted by Andy H

Though the jury is out on this candid veracity type of policy, I think on the whole its a positive step. I suppose one could hope that by being so overt, he is asking those in the firing line to be equally overt in their response.

However the real test is when somebody responds with equal force of words to what Cameron is using.

Its always easier to ask a specific question than give a specifc answer.

Regards

Andy H

I find it interesting that he chose to denounce Israel in Turkey and Pakistan in India. Could be construed as taking sides. Is that wise?

[Andy H]

Originally Posted by Fodder76

I find it interesting that he chose to denounce Israel in Turkey and Pakistan in India. Could be construed as taking sides. Is that wise?

Hi

Well the Turkey axis (no pun intended) is quite interesting. He had a go at Israel and broadly gained browny points in Europe for this, whilst having a go at the EU for its glacial attitude to Turkeys entrance to the EU. Turkey has the ability to be a great power broker in the ME given its Muslim/Secular culture, and all of Europe is broadly wanting an end to the Palestine question and inhernet Israeli fears about its security. Turkey could help this process, but the price for Europe could be quicker entrance to the EU.

Regards


Andy H

[Ogukuo72]

I'm not surprised. He doesn't exactly have foreign policy experience, right? Maybe he's trying to affect a Margaret Thatcher type swagger? Trying to borrow a bit of Maggie magic? Perhaps he should start toting a lady's handbag?

[Listy]

Originally Posted by Ogukuo72

I'm not surprised. He doesn't exactly have foreign policy experience, right? Maybe he's trying to affect a Margaret Thatcher type swagger? Trying to borrow a bit of Maggie magic? Perhaps he should start toting a lady's handbag?

But it has caused Pakistan to throw its teddy out of the pram. Hopefully it will get a message across, because lets face it, Pakistan is a bit of a problem on the terrorism front.
I'm pretty sure the Pakistan Government is behind the idea, its just having issues with its security services and enforcing the idea's in all corners of the country.