Will Tony Blair Experience the Same Fate as Jimmy Carter?

I suppose it is somewhat ironic that on the 25th anniversary of British territory being invaded by a fascist dictatorship, 15 British service personnel have been taken hostage by the Iranians. But there, the similarity ends. Whereas 25 years ago Britain responded with vigour and determination, our response to the Iranians has been muted and weak. The Iranians sense that Tony Blair is at the weakest point in his premiership and is a lame duck. They have exploited this weakness for all it is worth, and will probably continue to do so. In yesterday's Sunday Times, Michael Portillo made a chilling prediction...

"There may yet be an important item to add to Blair’s tombstone. President Jimmy Carter spent the night of January 19, 1981, sleeping fitfully on a sofa in the Oval Office, longing for news that 52 US hostages seized by Iran 444 days earlier would be released during this his last day in the White House. But the ayatollahs had one more humiliation in store for him. They released the kidnapped Americans only in the afternoon, minutes after the presidency had passed to Ronald Reagan. As Tony Blair enters his last 100 days he must wonder whether Tehran plans to belittle him in the same way. Will he bluster for the next three months, and then watch from the side-lines when the 15 hostages return, to be greeted on the tarmac by a beaming Gordon Brown, newly installed at No 10? "

Wouldn't that be the ultimate sign of Britain's weakness? Picture credit Conservative Home

Britannia Ruled the Waves

A reader emails me THIS link to an article in the New York Post headlined HOSTAGE SAILORS - BRITAIN'S IMPOTENCE. It says that the current crisis in Iran demonstrates how weak the British Navy has become and that HMS Cornwall should have blasted the Iranian abductors out of the water.

Whatever sympathy I might have for gunboat diplomacy is somewhat diminished by thinking that had they done just that it might well have triggered something far more dangerous. Remember August 1914, anyone?

Blair Must Stand Up to the Iranian Terrorists

Our government is being remarkably controlled in its reaction to the seizure of fifteen members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces by Iran. I assume they have a plan and don't want to inflame a very dangerous situation. Wars have started over far less.

However, the Iranians must be left in no doubt as to the seriousness of their actions. Merely calling in their Ambassador is not enough. It's clear this was a calculated action from the Iranians and intended to have consequences. I assume what they want is for us to look weak in the face of adversity. The Iranian leadership is looking fragile and what they need is a little 'foreign' episode to unite their people with them.

I am, however, slightly puzzled by the fact that HMS Cornwall did not intervene and go after the abductors. What other US or UK naval forces were in the area at the time? Surely they would have had every right to enter Iranian waters to respond to what was an illegal kidnapping?

One thing is for sure. If a certain Iron Lady had been PM we would have heard slightly more from her than we have from Mr Blair, who called the Iranian action "unjustified and wrong". No shit, Sherlock.

So, while I do not advocate going over the top in the use of bellicose rhetoric, I do hope that the stance which is being taken privately is far more hardline than that being taken in public.