Airstrip One

Diplomatic Tussles

Clinton's speech was a "mesmerising oration" according to the unbiased political correspondent of the Guardian, Patrick Wintour. From a quick scan, it appears that he emphasised action through the United Nations with a tough regime of weapons inspections but also sanctioned unilateral action, if necessary, because the Security Council was "was still guilty of taking decisions based on self-interest".

However, although Bush has obtained support from the House of Representatives, the UN Security Council remains out of his grasp. Both France and Russia favour the existing system of resolutions or a tougher version, as they have constructed a relationship with the Saddam regime that would fall apart if regime change were to occur. They also prefer the Security Council as a source of legitimation for their actions, when necessary, and pay lip-service to international law, without giving up the power necessary to provide the UN with teeth. However, this situation is inherently unstable and, as the actions in Kosovo demonstrated in 1999, the importance of the Security Council as a body for legalising and sanctioning military action, has started to decline and will decline further, if the American's ferocious resolution is not passed. France and Russia would then find that they have invested time and energy in an institution that sinks into irrelevence as the US starts to assert its hegemony.

The Sick Man of Europe

One of the problems with the wishlists of Euroscepticism is that those who consider the EU an eater of liberty tend to privilege certain possible outcomes because these complement their vision. Just as the Europhiles see a certain inevitability with "ever closer union", so some Eurosceptics prophesy that the EU will fall apart due to its currency scheme or end itself in an immolatory Ragnarok as a 21st century Soviet Union.

One of the more recent subjects taken up is the comparison of Germany and Japan, of rich nations slowly foundering against a deflationary iceberg. Hamish MacLeod gives a more realistic outcome: of slow growth and gradual reform over the next two to three years. A more radical discontinuity depends upon the growth of Germany's neighbours. If their growth is slow and unemployment in Germany rises to above five million, then a constituency for radical change may well develop.

Anti-Semtitism?

Is being critical of Israel, or support for Israel, the same as being anti-Semitic? An absurd allegation on the face of it but some people take it seriously.

Desperate Remedies

The Euro-fanatics are on the run. The Prime Minister has changed tack: no longer is the Euro vital to Britain's economic interests, it is instead integral to her political "destiny". Heseltine dutifully repeated this line on the Today programme this morning.

This is a major victory for the forces of reason & sanity. We have won the argument on the economy, & our opponents are giving up the attempt to scare the people into voting for the Euro on pain of poverty. Instead, they have fallen back on the old "inevitability" canard, dressed up with a little more honesty than we have hitherto seen about the essentially political nature of the whole European project. "Europe", they now tell us, is indispensable to peace. Never mind N.A.T.O., never mind nuclear weapons, never mind the overwhelming military superiority of the United States, never mind the enormous political will never to have another Continental war, which has so far driven European integration, but which surely would be enough by itself: it is the E.U. that has kept the peace these 50 years.

This transparent lie will be much easier to expose than their lies about the economy. That they should resort to it shows how desperate they are. We are winning. Let us press our advantage home.

Doubting Whittam Smith

The pundit speaks: I am all for European integration but I could have told you that the Euro won't work. Didn't you see me standing up and saying so. Well, it's Germany, you see. They could deflate (although they look like they already have - Ed). What they need is a solid bout of Keynesianism, more public spending, devaluation, the whole works, just like us in the 1960s. Maybe they should throw in some price and wage controls, just for the heck of it.

Stephen Pollard flagged this one up but he didn't warn of the Keystone Keynesianism attached to Whitters here. Rather nostaligic in its 70s feel, really. Thatchere never happened.