Kim Darroch: effectively sacked by Johnson on the orders of
Trump
There will be white-hot anger at the Foreign Office over the
Tory frontrunner’s role
Patrick Wintour Diplomatic editor
Wed 10 Jul 2019 14.08 BST
The resignation of Sir Kim Darroch followed the failure of
the likely next prime minister, Boris Johnson, to say he would support him
staying in post – despite being given repeated chances to do so during his TV
debate with Jeremy Hunt. As the current Foreign Office minister Alan Duncan put
it, by six times refusing to back the ambassador, Johnson had thrown him under
a bus.
Without the backing of the president of the US or his future
boss, Darroch naturally concluded he had no future as an interlocutor between
London and Washington. He realised, in the words of a friend, that Johnson had
left him no option.
There will now be white hot anger across the Foreign Office
and in parliament – not just at leaker and Trump, but also at Johnson. Whatever
sanctimonious expressions of regret he mouths, and however much he blames the
leaker, King Charles St knows that Sir Kim was effectively sacked by the
Conservative leadership candidate on the orders of the president.
Strenuous efforts were made in London to remind Sir Kim he
had the backing of the current prime minister, as well as the current foreign secretary
Jeremy Hunt. But Darroch, keenly aware of the importance of the special
relationship, something to which his career had been dedicated, decided he
could not afford to become an obstacle to its continuance.
His resignation means the malicious leaker has got his or
her way: it was pretty clear from the outset that the political purpose of the
leak was to get Sir Kim removed, and replaced by a true Brexiteer of the kind
Nigel Farage, and now apparently Johnson, believes is necessary if the UK is to
extract maximum political and economic value from Brexit.
It was also clear that, despite the foreign office’s
protestations, Trump was determined to blackball Sir Kim. He was not just
struck off the dinner guest list for the visit of the Emir of Qatar. A second
meeting with Wilbur Ross did not go ahead. Sir Kim himself excluded himself
from a meeting between the trade secretary, Liam Fox, and Ivanka Trump to avoid
any embarrassment for the president’s daughter.
It will be fascinating to see if Theresa May acts quickly to
appoint Darroch’s successor. Tempting as it might be to foil the leakers, and
install a career civil servant, it is probably irresponsible to pre-empt
Johnson. The UK ambassador to the US needs the confidence of his prime
minister.
Due to their professionalism, the diplomatic service will
swing behind Johnson when he reaches Downing Street. But he has revealed
himself to be a shallow man willing to take advantage of an illegal leak to
sack a man that had dedicated himself to public life. Evasion of personal
responsibility is already becoming the defining negative feature of his
candidacy.
Johnson will go through the doors of Downing Street at some
point this month smiling and wanting to be loved, but many will instead see him
as one interviewer Eddie Mair described him as “a nasty piece of work”. In the
words of a former army officer and the chairman of the foreign affairs select
committee, Tom Tugenhadt: “Leaders stand up for their men. They encourage them
to try and defend them when they fail.”
Sorry, but why is Liam Fox apologising to Ivanka Trump?
Arwa Mahdawi
It’s extraordinary that the trade secretary feels compelled
to grovel to the president’s daughter over the Kim Darroch cables. Her White
House role is fabricated, undeserved and nepotistic
Wed 10 Jul 2019 07.00 BST Last modified on Wed 10 Jul 2019
10.11 BST
Dear Liam Fox, it is with great regret that I am forced to
write this open letter asking: what the hell is wrong with you?
Apologies if that wasn’t particularly diplomatic; I am
simply taking a leaf out of Sir Kim Darroch’s book and being frank when it
comes to my assessment of your “dysfunctional” conduct. To repurpose some more
of the phraseology used by the British ambassador to the US, your recent
behaviour vis-a-vis Ivanka Trump “radiates insecurity” and is downright
embarrassing.
OK, enough with the open letter format. (It is an irritating
genre, isn’t it?) I am not here to converse with an imaginary Fox, I am here to
express my disgust that Britain’s international trade secretary seems to have
nothing better to do than kowtow to a power-hungry heiress. Fox, who is
visiting Washington DC, told BBC radio on Monday that he would be apologising
to Ivanka for Darroch’s leaked comments about her father. “I will be
apologising for the fact that either our civil service or elements of our
political class have not lived up to the expectations that either we have or the
United States has about their behaviour, which in this particular case has
lapsed in a most extraordinary and unacceptable way,” Fox said.
Sorry, what? Forget Ivanka; Fox should be apologising to the
English language for that sentence, which vacillated in a most extraordinary
and unacceptable way. Actually, let’s not forget Ivanka. Let’s remind ourselves
who she is. She is the daughter of the president; she has a cryptic and
undeserved role in the White House; she jets around the world pretending she is
qualified to talk to dignitaries and shape global policy. She is all hair and
hypocrisy and nepotism. It is ridiculous that Fox is apologising to her.
Or perhaps it isn’t. Perhaps Fox is being strategic. It
seems he is in Washington for Brexit-related talks with her. Perhaps this
apology will help Britain negotiate a great trade deal with the US. Perhaps Fox
has traded the NHS for a truckload of Ivanka-branded handbags. Viva the special
relationship!
•Arwa Mahdawi is a Guardian columnist
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário