Foreign secretaries

All governments have someone who is responsible for relationships with foreign countries. Ours is called the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs; today it is a bloke of the name Ed Miliband – pleasant but looks dreadfully inexperienced. The USA simply calls the job ‘Secretary of State’ and the current holder of that title is the redoubtable Hillary Clinton. There has been comment that Hillary and Ed get along very well even hints that there might be a sexual chemistry between them. Cannot say that I am surprised. Ed’s a pretty boy and so was Bill Clinton so she’d fancy him.

The European Union picked a woman, Baroness Catherine Ashton, to be its first ‘High Representative for Foreign Affairs’ back in November. None of us knew her and when you read up on her you understand that she has bugger all experience of most other countries. Oh yes, she may have been to conferences in 5 star hotels in Rio or Vladivostok but what is her sense of history? As I said about impotent chiefs earlier, just another time waster elected on the basis of ‘won’t cause trouble.’

We had a Labour guy, David Owen in this job in the late 70’s, doctor of medicine. And he went to Iran to meet the Shah. All I recall is that after he left, the Shah asked those around him, ‘Is he any good as a doctor?’ Says it all doesn’t it.

And then you have two towering figures in this job – Molotov and Kissinger. Molotov is a distant figure to me but he survived under Stalin and brokered many deals. Kissinger? Dunno how history would judge him but he always seemed to have some common sense. Like so many others he really didn’t achieve much in Vietnam. He fought tirelessly for peace in the Middle East but then he would do for he is of Jewish origins. Not sure of his interaction with Anwar Sadat but I imagine that it was positive.

I dare say that I have visited more countries than most of these buggers and I would say that I have a fair knowledge of history. Does that qualify me for the post of Foreign Secretary? ‘Yes and No,’ is my conclusion. You can draw your own. ‘Yes,’ I guess because I have knowledge of these places and their history. ‘No,’ because I cannot help feeling involved in them and that would discount me on the grounds of being subjective. On balance, it is a ‘No.’

But we do need clear and firm people in this job and in Britain at least, we have certainly failed to choose such people. Who the hell remembers Francis Pym? I have talked much on appeasement before and our lot seem hell bent on it. Let’s face it, if anyone had suggested the conquest of India to the Foreign Office, they would have said, ‘Oh dear, no.’ But no one asked the East India Company that question and they just went ahead with it.

I suppose if you are not the head of state or prime minister, then the most coveted post is to be the head of foreign affairs. You don’t have to worry about the home economy, home affairs, business, trade or pretty much anything that affects the everyday lives of the people who elected you and your government. No, all you have to do is travel to conferences much warmer than the UK in winter, call in the odd ambassador and bollock him for locking up some Brit who had 5kg of cocaine in his bowels, make the odd statement like ‘condemn’ or ‘deplore,’ or ‘deeply shocked,’ and so on and so on. And of course, if anything unexpected happens as it did for Peter Carrington in the Falklands invasion, you can put it all down to ‘poor intelligence.’ You’ll look good though straddling the world stage.

But Mr Miliband, on my next trip, to West Africa, your lot say I should not go to Timbuktu cus I might get killed. What are you or Hillary or any other bugger doing about that? And what about the starving people in this world? Not your problem, I suspect. That will be down to some department of International Development or whatever. I guess giving support to wogs is someone else’s business.