Will anything really new happen in the New Year? Probably not
FRANK JOHNSON
Centuries, historians now say, are not so simple as just to start with their first year and end with their last. For exam
ple, the 19th century was at home the century of the bourgeoisie's rise to broad omnipotence, and abroad of general peace among the great powers, give or take the Crimea and Prussia's quick wins over Austria and France. But in that case, it is said, the 19th century began in 1815 and ended in 1914. Likewise, the 20th century began in 1914 and ended with the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989.
This principle should also be applied to years. For quite a few of us, the only depressing aspect of the long Christmas–New Year cessation of work is being confronted with all the newspaper and television 'reviews' of the dying year. Within a few days, it becomes clear that the New Year will be much the same as the old year. This does not mean that all years are the same as one another. It is a reasonable estimate, however, that it takes about five or at most ten years for them to change. Thus it is fair to say that 2001, because of the Twin Towers, was the first new year since 1989. Something happened in 2001 which made 2001, and the years since, different from what they would have otherwise have been.
What could make 2004 a new year? At home, perhaps, Mr Brown's replacing of Mr Blair; but it is not at all clear that that would change anything much. Mr Brown is surely just pretending to be more 'old Labour' than Mr Blair. He is doing so in order to ensure that he receives old Labour support in any leadership contest. There is nothing old Labour about his sole distinguishing, and so far successful, course of action: the surrender of fiscal policy to the capitalist Bank of England. The Tories opposed it, he sometimes claims. That is untrue. Mr Kenneth Clarke, the outgoing Tory chancellor, opposed it. Mr Norman Lamont is said, when chancellor, to have been privately sympathetic to it. Mr Brown would be unable to name a single Labour voice which publicly advocated it when Labour was in opposition, including his own. Over the years, the only voices raised in its favour were from the `free market Right'. Mr Brown's replacing of Mr Blair would be an important and interesting event in the history of the Labour party, not in the history of the nation.
The replacing of President Bush by Mr Howard Dean or some other Democrat? Would that produce a New Year? But even if Mr Bush loses, there is not at the moment much evidence that his defeat would alter the course of events in the Middle East. Some of us do not see Mr Bush as the stubborn, Republican Right, or neoconservative, ideologue who is determined to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes to impose America's idea of democracy on Iraq and then on the rest of the Middle East. We see him as a professional politician who has become increasingly worried that he took the advice of the Republican Right, and neoconservatives, and went into Iraq in the first place. They told him that the Iraqis would welcome him. Perhaps a majority of Iraqis do. But a worrying number do not, and among them are those prepared to kill American troops. He is now signalling to American voters that he is not going to stay there for long. Hence his talk of handing Iraq over to the Iraqis. In due course, this will probably result in another Iraqi dictatorship. But that would cause no nagging concern to Mr Bush because by then he would have been re-elected.
The present situation in Iraq is constantly likened to that of 1960s Vietnam. There are similarities. But one which has not been much mentioned is with 1960s American politics. The war caused President Johnson to announce that he would not run again in 1968. But, despite it, he had already been elected — in 1964. In 1964, the war did not worry enough voters to prevent his winning the election. That could be the case with the Iraq war and the voters in 2004. After 1964, in due course, America fled Vietnam and that country became a dictatorship. But by that time American voters were relieved to be out, and concerned with other things. Something similar could be the case vis-à-vis the American electorate and Iraq.
Any Democrat president elected in 2004 would also withdraw from Iraq. The Republicans, in opposition, and Mr Bush in retirement, would accuse him of appeasement and scuttle. But if what I say is right, their own policy would have been no differ
ent. A Democrat replacing Mr Bush in the White House would be an interesting and important event in the history of the Republican party, not of the United States.
The year 2004, then, looks like being a continuation of all years since 2001. Our main worry — terrorism — remains the same. As with every year since 2001, we expect and fear another outrage comparable to that of the Twin Towers, either in the United States or in Britain. Our other worries are also the same, though growing. There is officialdom's preoccupation with health and safety, suggesting that officialdom is only concerned that we stay alive for as long as possible, not that we enjoy or fulfil ourselves in doing so or are the cause of enjoyment or fulfilment in others.
This concern is extending across all creation. The newspapers of early January announced the 'slimmer of the year'. But 2 January's Daily Telegraph also had the headline: 'Quarter of Cats and Dogs at Risk from Obesity'. A '400-page report from the National Research Council, based in the United States,' had said so, it seemed. We did not have to read on. The spirit of the age taught us what the report recommended for cats and dogs: no smoking, regular visits to the gym, more fresh fruit and muesli, no more than two units of alcohol a day, either beer, wine or spirits.
By 5 January, this year proved to be identical to last year for the Prince of Wales. The Mirror had a note from Diana, Princess of Wales, of which butler Burrell was once again the source, suggesting that the Prince wanted her killed. In 2004, as a result of Burrell in the Mirror, there was an implication of some connection between the Prince and homosexual activity.
Perhaps the Prince's father was at last sympathetic to his son's successive ordeals: it's all very well being accused of wanting to murder that mad girl, m'boy, but making you out to be a queer meant that Burrell went too far. Convinced that 2003 and 2004 were the same year, those of us whose work takes them to Parliament, with the Commons returned, took the Circle line to Westminster. At each station a familiar announcement had slightly different wording: 'Please mind the gap between train and platform.' As opposed to, presumably, the gap between Islam and the West, the north and south of England, rich and poor, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats in the polls. The same New Year to all my readers.
Previous page
