Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague has obviously hired Sir Humphrey Appleby to be his new speechwriter. Here's is civil service-speak response to General Petraeus' report to the US Congress on the progress of President Bush's surge strategy:
"It appears that the US troop surge has had mixed results so far, but it is clear that there is no purely military solution available to the situation in Iraq. The surge was intended to give a breathing space to the Iraqi government to allow it to make progress towards national reconciliation. It is of paramount importance that efforts to achieve that progress are now redoubled.
It is healthy that the US congress receives regular reports on the political and military situation in Iraq. As long as British troops are in that country there should also be a full, quarterly report to our parliament from the British government on the progress made.
Any decision concerning US troop levels is a matter for the US, although we would hope that decisions on US and UK deployments in Iraq are always made in consultation with each other. We support the reductions in British troop levels announced so far and believe that British forces should remain in Iraq only so long as they are needed for the political stability of the country, the security of Southern Iraq, and have a defensible military position. We look forward to the Government’s assessment of these factors as soon as possible, and in any event when parliament returns."
See BritainAndAmerica for much more.
8.30pm: Fraser Nelson - over at The Spectator - wishes William Hague had been more Giuliani-like. That's a big part of the Tory problem. We don't have a Giuliani character.
Weak, weak, weak.
Posted by: Umbrella man | September 10, 2007 at 20:32
All i'm saying is this: when Cameron loses the next General Election and there's a leadership contest lets not rush back to Hague.
Posted by: Radical Tory | September 10, 2007 at 21:37
A 'Giuliani figure'?
It depends which aspect of his character you're looking at...
Posted by: Mike A | September 10, 2007 at 21:52
Hague's statement seems reasonable to me.
Posted by: Simon Newman | September 10, 2007 at 21:57
This post suggests that ConservativeHome may be moderating comments but the Editors remain determined to be independent. Those who think CH is to become slavish to Cameronism should read the above!!!
Posted by: Alan S | September 10, 2007 at 22:55
Guiliani is in big trouble now that Fred Thompson has joined the race. Rudy is a liberal who is courted the neo-cons by appointing the notorious Norman Podhoretz as his his foreign policy adviser.
The neo-cons, however, now have their own candidate in Fred Thompson. Thompson was the key figure behind the Scooter Libby defence fund. He is Bush-Cheney candidate and it would not be surprising if Karl Rove joins his team in the near future.
The neo-cons trust Thompson more than Guiliani and will ensure that he has all the money that he needs to win. Rudy will be offered the VP slot as a second prize.
Winning the Presidential election will be another matter.
Posted by: Moral minority | September 10, 2007 at 23:01
What a relief it is to know that all the presidental candidates are prepared to bite the bullet and deal with Iran one way or tother (see the Spectator article). Someone should point out to Hague and Co exactly where Iran is on the map in relation to Iraq and of its involvement in the "mixed message".
Posted by: Dontmakemelaugh | September 11, 2007 at 00:05
My only problem with Hague's statement is that he is not calling for an immediate withdrawal of all British troops.
We had no busines being in Iraq in the first place, we have no business being there now, and the sooner we pull out the better.
Months back Cameron seemed to be getting into the business of making apologies (to Mandela etc) Well the only apology I'd like to see him make is to the Iraqi people for supporting Bush's murderous war against them and to the British people for supporting the sacrifice of British lives to the cause of American greed and stupidity.
Those units who have taken place in the great American Iraq-grab should be awarded the battle-honour 'Halliburton'.
Posted by: Traditional Tory | September 11, 2007 at 06:37
"Traditional Tory", more cameroonian "not the tory party" rather than traditional. To pull out now would be to betray all those who welcomed the fall of Sadam and would lead to a bloodbath. Not a tradition I would follow, it is neither ethical nor moral. But then the present party seems deficient in both areas.
Posted by: Derek Buxton | September 11, 2007 at 15:15
"Traditional Tory", more cameroonian "not the tory party" rather than traditional.
That's a new one. Me a Cameroon!!! I love that.
To pull out now would be to betray all those who welcomed the fall of Sadam and would lead to a bloodbath
Most of the terrorists operating in Iraq now welcomed the removal of Saddam. A lot of ordinary Iraqis wish he had never been removed.
Posted by: Traditional Tory | September 11, 2007 at 17:06
Traditional Tory, that would be if there was such a thing as an 'Iraqi'. Iraq is an artificial creation of the colonial powers Britain & France.
The Kurds are ecstatic about mass murdering tyrant Saddams death. And that alone should be reason enough to be happy about. It's time the promise of an independent Kurdistan was delivered. France & Britain stabbed the Kurds in the back in 1922 with their shady deal with Atatürk.
Posted by: Daniel | September 12, 2007 at 19:01
Making Hague more like Giuliani doesn't sound like much of a solution. Hague's already pro-gay marriage, for one thing. Making him pro-baby-killing as well will hardly be an improvement.
What would be an improvement would be if he just stopped being such a creep. The Government is now fully committed to its retreat from Iraq. Why on earth doesn't the Opposition DO something and oppose for once? He's supposed to be a Tory and he sounds like a member of Greenpeace or CND or Amnesty or something.
Posted by: Oliver McCarthy | September 13, 2007 at 01:47