If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Labours Ethical Foreign Policy
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Is the Iraq war part of Labours Ethical Foreign policy? I'm confused! 
0
Comments
Why is he talking "like a twat"? It`s the first I`ve seen RK ask an interesting question :thumb:
I`m surprised no-one has asked Fuhrer Blair.......or have they?
seeker
Well, you beloved Tory party supported the war, so it couldn't have been all bad?
When told flaky intel now withdrawn is gospel truth and meant that chemical and biological warheads could be fired upon british interests it kinda seemed stupid to leave the situation as is.
Turned out the ethical policy setup by president blair goes out the window when bush says jump. Bush did aleast say he wanted regime change, badly conceived maybe, but atleast he didnt lie.
I assume you are basing your opinion on the concept of "countries" ? Would you also reduce it to fundamentals,and apply it to individuals?
seeker
I'm not basing it on the concept of anything: foreign policy is generally taken to mean the way in which one country manages its interaction with others. In that, the projection of power/promotion of one's own interests is of primary importance.
No, I wouldn't reduce it to an individual level. I don't have a clearly thought out policy on how to deal with friends in the pub, or what to say when I ring my mum. Talking about an individual's 'foreign policy' - well, except in the case of a national leader - sounds absurd, I think.
Ethics will always come a poor second to promoting one's own interests. Which is why Blair sold those Hawks to Suharto - not because he wanted to, especially, but by doing so he provided work for BAe, which was strugglign at the time. Ethics took second place to protecting British jobs.
So forgive my cynicism, but no I don't think there can ever be a really ethical foreign policy.
It was never a 'concept' as such IMO: it was just a soundbite that was calculated to appear nice and fluffy and appealing to all the wiberals out there.
International politics = naked power play. Everything else comes second. Whenever a politician starts banging on about moral responsibilities and the rest, assume he's lying or he's George Bush. Or both.
That shows a high level of faith in the UN.
I'm simply putting forward my views on issues but obviously as the government of the day Labour must stand up and be counted for their abysmal performance over the past 8 years.
Yes they will definitely win a third time, probably by some huge landslide, but nevertheless their deficiencies are there for all to see despite all the spin.
Returning to the ethical foreign policy topic
http://www.guardian.co.uk/zimbabwe/article/0,2763,191642,00.html
So are you saying a "foreign policy" is unethical and immoral because it is about projecting power.
Without wishing to invade your privacy how do you "deal with friends in the pub" and "what do you say to your mum on the phone"?Did you use those examples to make the point that you don`t "project power" over them?(I`m second guessing here :chin: )
seeker
No, but the fact it's about projecting power or protecting one's own interests militates against a foreign policy ever being truly ethical, because when it cmes to a conflict between ethics and national interest, the latter will always win out. I used the example of BAe systems and the hawk jet they sold to Indonesia. If Blair (or IIRC Robin Cook, who was foreign secretary at the time) had decided that it was ethically more important not to sell fighter jets to a dictator, the trade-off for that would have been a lost contract and, potentially, job losses at British firms. Ethics were never going to be allowed to win out over creating employment, were they?
Yes, that was what I was trying to get across. Personal relationships are not about projecting power, and there isn't the same web of vested interests and political necessities to guide your actions as there is with foreign policy - or politics of any sort, really. That's why you can't meaningfully compare the two.
You appear to be saying that politicians essentially lack ethics because they abnegate personal responsibility as a direct consequence of being "a politician".Is my reading of this correct?
seeker
Nearly. No matter how 'ethical' an individual politician may be, they'll never be able to act entirly according to their own conscience, because they have to take into account a whole load of other considerations - many of which may be highly unethical.