Voice of doom
Michael Vestey
Ireally must stop listening to Straw Poll on Radio Four. The feebleness of some of its contributors, and members of the audience and listeners emailing and phoning in are beginning to lower the spirits. They no longer sound like TPWW, The People We Were in this country, capable of self-sufficiency, resolute in the face of danger with a wartime courage. If they are in any way representative of The People We Are, then were doomed, It might be just that most of the kind of people who contribute to this programme and who vote at the end of it are a breed of activists of a familiar kind: leftish, of course, pacifist, statist, self-haters and anti-American. As I wrote recently, it's possible that TPWW have better things to do than listen to Straw Poll on a Friday evening and then vote or call the following lunchtime; I don't know.
Having heard a previous Straw Poll this summer in which the audience and listeners voted for more government controls over the consumption of fatty foods — the nanny state, in other words — I couldn't help wondering how Radio Four listeners would approach last Friday's motion that the war on terror could only be won by force. I didn't expect much from the invited audience in the hall, especially when I heard it was being held at the Foreign Press Association in London — a venue bound to attract a certain type. Nor was I surprised when at the end of the debate they voted by just over three to one against the motion. More sadly, and shockingly in my view, in Straw Poll Talkback the next day, listeners voted 73 per cent against the motion with only 27 per cent in favour. Had Osama bin Laden been listening in his cave, he would have been delighted at how decadent and timid the British had become, assuming, that is, that he thought that these were the voices of the nation. One can only hope they aren't.
Proposing the motion were Dominic
Cummings, a former Tory strategy chief. and Michael Gove of the Times. Against were Rosemary Hollis, head of the Middle East programme at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, and Fred Halliday, professor of international relations at the LSE. Cummings thought the problem was largely what he called Islam's international crisis, not the issue of Palestine. Those failed regimes that support terrorism did so to distract their peoples from that very failure of Islamic societies to provide employment and education. Islam's crisis has occurred in the age of destructive technology. Gave put a more coherent case, pointing out that the war on terror is not a war of our choice. 'Just as we appeased in the 1930s because our leaders operated in the shadow of the first world war, so we appeased in the 1990s because our leaders operated in the shadow of Vietnam.' Terrorists drew the conclusion that we were weak, and were emboldened like the dictators of the Thirties.
Halliday's views are curious. I remember him well for his support for the overthrow of the Shah of Iran, which brought us the vile, cruel and loopy mullahs that have so inspired Osama bin Laden and, indeed, who continue to finance him while helping to destabilise Iraq. I think he rather regretted it later. He drew a few sniggers from the audience when, referring to regimechange, he said that 'we' had overthrown the Shah leading to Ayatollah Khomeini's rule 'so I wouldn't advise it'. Of course it's a simple matter to rewrite history, and needless to say it wasn't long before he was blaming Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan for having created bin Laden. Nothing to do with the fall of the Shah, of course.
The hall applauded when he said that George Bush 'has not understood what he's up against. He's a lot dumber than bin Laden, That is our problem.' Amid this Bush-hating twaddle, Hollis limply suggested that 'using muscle as the primary focus of your war on terrorism is going to backfire on you'. She thought the answer was a combination of legal, diplomatic, police and intelligence measures that should take precedence over the use of force. I suppose it could be tried: a nice letter to bin Laden offering a summit (possibly at Chatham House), tea with the Queen, a tour of Prince Charles's garden, a free box of Duchy biscuits; now look here, old chap, what are we going to do about this ticklish situation, eh? We're reasonable men, aren't we? That should do the trick. If you're reading this on Saturday this week you will not need to be reminded that it is the third anniversary of 9/11. For some people, perhaps the majority in this country, it might never have happened for all they've learnt from it. Fortunately, Straw Poll won't be returning until next summer. Perhaps by then TPWW might have re-emerged.
Previous page
