I REMEMBER sitting stunned in my car listening to the radio as the horrific news from New York filtered through about the destruction of the Twin Towers. And I remember being chilled when George Bush declared a War on Terror in response.
At the Labour Party conference of October 2001, Tony Blair enthusiastically joined the War on Terror and made clear his backing for air strikes against Afghanistan. He declared: “Whatever the dangers of caution, the dangers of inaction are far, far greater.”
Insofar as there was any strategy involved, it was summed up by the right-wing media commentator Andrew Neil, who wrote in Scotland on Sunday: “If al Qaeda’s most important centres are destroyed, the rest will wither on the vine.”
It all sounded so simple.
Two days after air strikes were launched against Afghanistan, the Prime Minister told the House of Commons: “Initial indications are that the coalition operations were successful in achieving their objective of destroying and degrading elements of the al Qaeda terrorist facilities and the Taliban military apparatus that protects them.”
Blair’s status shot into the stratosphere. He was lauded across the world, praised by every national newspaper and backed by all the mainstream political parties. Any voices of dissent were drowned out like a lullaby in a thunderstorm.
One of those dissidents was Jeremy Corbyn, who told the MPs that “civilians would die in any military strike, and Britain should not be sucked into a new Afghan civil war”.
Along with most other readers of The National, I have strong disagreements with Corbyn over Scottish independence. He’s wedded to the old Labourite left, which has never quite managed to break with the idea of the British Road to Socialism. It may have made some sense in bygone decades, before globalisation, devolution and the emergence of progressive, civic nationalism in various parts of Europe. But it’s an idea whose time has gone.
However, I also believe in giving credit where it’s due. Corbyn is a consistent, principled politician. And unlike the Blairites out to destroy him, he is intelligent, and called it 100 per cent absolutely right on Afghanistan and Iraq.
Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for the rest of his party, not least his deputy, Tom Watson. It mystified me that Watson managed to present himself as the left-wing candidate in the deputy leadership election.
When Blair was in his heyday, Watson was a staunch Blairite. He was a vocal supporter of the invasion of Iraq, and even attacked the late Charlie Kennedy as “anti-British” for supporting France’s more cautious approach.
His sycophantic support for the Iraq war landed him promotion to a key position in the Ministry of Defence.
As Labour’s campaign organiser in the Birmingham Hodge-Hill by-election in 2004, Watson was responsible for a disgusting and inflammatory leaflet which accused the Liberal Democrats of being “on the side of failed asylum seekers”.
He has always strongly supported nuclear weapons and spending £160 billion on renewing Trident. And as vice-president of Labour Friends of Israel, he is a zealous supporter of the state whose brutal suppression of Palestinian rights over decades has been one of the major causes of the destabilisation of the Middle East and the rise in terrorism.
Like Corbyn, Watson’s stand on Syrian air strikes is consistent with the position he took on Afghanistan and Iraq. But Corbyn was right, 100 per cent. And Watson was wrong, 100 per cent. The deputy is now on the rampage against his leader, supporting Syrian strikes and helping foment mutiny in the ranks of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
With the Blairite machine roaring back into action at the scent of another foreign war, and the deputy leader back on-message, no-one would bet their life savings on Corbyn leading Labour into next year’s Scottish elections, never mind the 2020 General Election.
It was once said of the Greek philosopher Aristotle that he was like a sober man among drunkards. That’s how Jeremy Corbyn is beginning to look within the context of the modern British Labour party.
If he is removed for sticking to his principles, the Labour Party will deserve to die. I’d like to see Corbyn and his allies help it on its way by walking out and creating a reformed labour movement in England based on solid left-wing foundations, and forging a loose alliance with other left of centre parties in other parts of the UK, including the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens and RISE.
In the meantime, Westminster is about to embark on another glorious mission to bring peace to the world. They may even achieve a military victory of sorts, but like the doctor who pronounced the operation a great success, even though the patient died, the cost could be catastrophic in the long run.
Even animals learn from their own mistakes. They avoid fire because it burns. If they can’t swim they avoid deep water. They stay out of the road of larger predators.
But not the Blairite wing of the Labour Party. They bombed and invaded Afghanistan to destroy al Qaeda– and created a monster even more dangerous and desperate. They tore apart Iraq and killed a million people in the name of peace and security, and left us a world wracked by violence and chaos.
Those of us who marched against the bombing of Afghanistan way back at the beginning of the War on Terror warned then that the only war that could guarantee long-term success would be a war against destitution. Since then, trillions have been spent on bombings and wars. For just a fraction of that cost we could have transformed the Middle East and marginalised violent fundamentalism across the Muslim world.
Jeremy Corbyn is one of the few in the Parliamentary Labour Party who seem to grasp that reality. But like with Afghanistan, he’ll struggle to be heard talking sense. As the pressure builds to be on the side of bombing Syria, we should look no further than Afghanistan for all the reasons to resist.
Nato general Sir Richard Shirreff warns air strikes on Syria are useless
Corbyn under pressure over looming vote on air strikes
The National View: Jeremy Corbyn has power to stop air strikes before they happen
George Kerevan: Cameron’s ‘send in Biggles’ attitude will do nothing to solve the terror of Daesh
Former residents of Daesh stronghold Raqqa tell of fears UK bombs could kill loved ones left behind
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here