USSR versus EUSR? I’m on neither side.

 

Some  polling by Lord Ashcroft earlier this year reveals that most UK voters have an understandably dim view of Russia. Many of us have no wish to see part of the  USSR recreated by bluff or force in the east. More  interesting and less obvious was that most British voters had an even worse perception of the EU than of Russia, especially Conservative voters. In his poll where 10 is very positive and zero is very negative, Russia scored 4.07, the EU 4.00 and the European Parliament 3.5. Amongst Conservative and UKIP voters the EU score was even lower.

I found myself in rare agreement yesterday with Sir Menzies Campbell when he said there should be a negotiated solution to the problems of the Ukraine: ratcheting up the threats and rhetoric will not help.  I have no sympathy for Russian actions that might destabilise the Ukraine further.  Nor can  I can forget that it was EU action seeking to expand their empire to the West which first started the reactions of Russia. The EU was seeking to entice the whole of the Ukraine towards EU membership and the common security and defence policy via a close Association Agreement. EU pressure helped lead to  the removal of the elected President from power in the Ukraine, which has allowed Russia to question the legality and authority of the interim Ukrainian government that replaced him.

The truth is UK people do not want to belong to a common foreign and security policy which seeks to extend an armed empire of Europe eastwards to the Russian border in a way which Russia finds menacing, but which Russia can also exploit for her own imperial aims. The EU has developed more of the common foreign policy before getting so far with the common army, so it is particularly foolish to push for a bigger EU reach when there is no effective military force to deal with possible adverse military reactions from others.

Some of my Parliamentary colleagues say the UK has to go along with the Ukrainian/US view of the current proto conflict. They imply that because we are members of the Security Council we have to play a role, and suggest there is a simple binary choice to be made between being on the side of the West or backing Mr Putin. I do not see it like that, as this is based on a misunderstanding of the role of the UN and the responsibilities of a Security Council member.

I do want a UK independent of an EU foreign policy to remain  as a member of the UN Security Council.  To keep our seat we need to maintain sufficient modern arms, have  a capacity to intervene, and a willingness to use our force in pursuit of UN causes where needed and where we wish to help  in proportion to our strength . That is what we have done in recent years and can still do. There is no question of us being able or being asked to intervene in the Ukraine through the UN, as the Security Council will not be able to establish a common view on the problem as the opposing  sides are members with vetoes. Similarly, our decision through Parliament not to intervene in Syria did not let down the UN, as Russia was unlikely to agree to western armies entering Damascus or NATO planes  bombing the country.

I do  not think there is much the UK can do to help make matters better in the Ukraine. We have little direct national interest in the Ukraine, and little diplomatic or military power of our own that could make the situation better.  The best we could do is to urge the EU to be less provocative, and to cease supporting the interim Ukrainian regime. It would be better for the EU  to await the election of a new government, and then if that government is  wise and making  sense to use the EU’s  diplomatic skills to help them calm down the tense situation within their country.

The UK should be clearer in opposing a full scale common foreign and security policy for the EU. My colleagues who want us to keep and use our seat on the UN Security Council should realise that the logic of CFSP is one permanent  Security Council seat for the EU in the end, to replace France and the UK.  Anyone interested in our country and its influence in the world should be working  to prevent such an outcome. In the meantime we do not have to choose between an EU dominated Ukraine or a Russian dominated one, nor do we have the power to decide what the outcome might be.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

89 Comments

  1. Lifelogic
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 5:23 am | Permalink

    Exactly, I agree fully.

    • Hope
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:18 am | Permalink

      Broadly agree. JR, does the UK have the power to recall and sack Ashton? If it does she should go straight away.

      The EU started this mess with the backing of the US to make further inroads to dismantle Russia and create its new world order. The US made a huge deal out of Cuba, why does it think Russia would act any differently when its security is being encroached?

      Although the West’s use of propaganda to create a version of events to suit its own ends never ceases to amaze me. We hear today how two professors (Stavin and Toll) expose the distorted IPPC report. Government officials coerced changes effectively making the report a sham and anything but an independent report. What a surprise.

      Time for radical changes at DECC to ensure a balanced accurate picture is presented to the public, not one that is skewed to suit a defined gaol to fool the public. Perhaps the accurate picture of events involving the Drax power plant can also be established.

      • Timaction
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 10:26 am | Permalink

        A good analysis Mr Redwood. One that the mainstream media would be good to follow, but we all see and hear the events distorted by the main stream media in the West to support the EU/USA agenda, claiming Russia as the aggressors.
        The same applies to our membership of the EU and the LibLabCon legacy parties who claim the benefits of trade with the EU and then lie with the loss of jobs etc etc. Mr Farage comprehensively beat Mr Clegg on every argument relating to our continued membership of the EU yet your leader still went on the BBC news the following morning to peddle the same lies and propaganda.
        The arguments are lost and now all they do is smear and lie to try and defeat the only anti EU party. The public are now aware and the we can see victory in the coming election.
        The legacy parties arguments for renegotiation or just continued membership no longer wash and are unacceptable.
        We will get our Country back and our democracy restored despite the legacy parties opposition.

        • Hope
          Posted April 27, 2014 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

          The US has already damaged BP with the Obama British Petroleum rhetoric and skewed punative penalties imposed on it. Where will see companies stand if sanctions are imposed on Russsia,what impact will it have on the city business and why is Cameron risking all of this as part of our national interest for EU expansionism? The EU is already fighting for FTT to be imposed on the city to gain tax for Germany- the result expected this week. This will be taxation without representation imposed by the EU. Where is all the top table talk when the UK is defenceless to stop the EU taking our money and business? Is Cameron still minded to fight heart and soul to stay in the EU? Time to rid Cameron from office; he is doing too much damage to the UK economy, business and our social and cultural life as we know it.

          • Hope
            Posted April 27, 2014 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

            JR, has anyone asked if the £18 million pounds Cameron authorised from UK taxpayers’ money to promote closer union with the EU is being used on any aspect of this issue or any of the smear campaigns against UKIP?

            Reply No, though some of us opposed this money at the time.

          • uanime5
            Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

            The EU is already fighting for FTT to be imposed on the city to gain tax for Germany

            Got any evidence that Germany will be the main beneficiary from this. Especially since the same tax will apply to Germany.

            This will be taxation without representation imposed by the EU.

            What about MEPs? Aren’t they are form of representation?

      • uanime5
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

        The EU started this mess with the backing of the US to make further inroads to dismantle Russia and create its new world order.

        How exactly is wanting Ukraine to join the EU an attempt to dismantle Russia? At present Ukraine isn’t part of Russia.

        Mr Farage comprehensively beat Mr Clegg on every argument relating to our continued membership of the EU

        No he didn’t, Farage’s statistics and evidence was shown to be made up.

        The legacy parties arguments for renegotiation or just continued membership no longer wash and are unacceptable.

        Polling has shown that the general public doesn’t object to the EU. That’s why the majority of the public won’t vote for UKIP in the EU elections.

        • Timaction
          Posted April 28, 2014 at 9:06 am | Permalink

          http://www.w4mpjobs.org/JobDetails.aspx?jobid=45223

          Is this you Uanime5?
          Do you rely on the BBC for your news? Didn’t you watch the debates?
          Mr Clegg was found wanting and disingenuous with the 3 million jobs at risk and the 7% of laws made by the EU!
          See the latest polls on voters intentions at the Euro elections!

  2. margaret brandreth-j
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    Why do people tell others that we have a choice of this or that? It is though they themselves seek to set the agenda and put constraints on all possible alternatives thereby attempting to elevate their own status to one of power.

    I agree; we should stand by on this one and observe,

  3. Antisthenes
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 6:30 am | Permalink

    The EU certainly have made a terrible error of judgement but then the whole construct of the EU was a gross error of judgement even if the concept of a common market was not. However that is now water under the bridge and the appropriate actions have to be taken to cope with the serious problems that the EU has caused. Deciding what to do about the construct and the hornets nest that has been unleashed in the Ukraine is not going to be at all easy to solve. The involvement of Russia a very unstable entity because of it’s Mafia style form of government lead by a man who has grandiose ambitions is making decision making by western leaders very difficult especially as many of them are not up to the task. One error of judgement now and we know their are many capable of it from Vlad the impaler to Obama the lefty incompetent and the whole thing can escalate out of control or at least create a new cold war. The former could be very terrible and the latter would have some benefits as well as dangers. Those benefits would be the west retuning to a situation of close cooperation and and a realignment rightwards of economic and social policies as wealth creation once again would be seen as the necessary cornerstone of defeating the likes of Putin.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:06 am | Permalink

      Antisthenes – We now have many people from former USSR states living among us. At least some of them must have sympathies towards Russia.

      We already have serious domestic security issues concerning conflicts in the middle east.

      The issue of national loyalties has become extremely complex and chaotic. A new era of cold war espionage is just what we need. (Not)

      • Anonymous
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:07 am | Permalink

        Could we really be any worse off without politicians ?

      • Antisthenes
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 11:07 am | Permalink

        I do not support a new cold war and indeed agree with you that the problems we all face are very complex. For once I agree with Blair that one of the biggest not only for us but Russia and China is the rapid rise of Muslim fundamentalism. For that reason alone cooperation rather squabbling is of prime importance. However if a solution that is acceptable to all sides to the current Ukrainian situation is not found and a cold war does start then we should use whatever silver lining comes out of it. The Islamic threat is very real as not only are there those outside our borders who wish to destroy our society and change our way of life there are a significant number inside that also wish to do the same and growing.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      What does one expect from a growth crushing monster like the EU desperate to fulfill the youthful ambitions of done of its present leaders.

      I am English, but I can see that Putin is head and shoulders above Western leaders in his statecraft. I do not subscribe to the idea of Russia having imperial ideas. It’s nonsense. It may have some territorial disputes which gave fallen out of the dismantlement of the USSR, but they are NOT a threat to us. We have been trading quite nicely over the last few years and binding them into trading and cultural links. All I see at the moment is continual Western interference all over the shop which is destabilising countries for no real benefit to us. What is wrong with diplomacy through trade.

      Again, I am not pro or anti anyone, I am looking at the reality of the situation. I think that John has put together some powerful arguments as best he can considering his position. The UN seat is the obvious one. Does anyone really think that the UK will get to keep the seat at the table if it adopts EU foreign policy objectives. They call us ‘little Englanders’ but we can call them ‘little Europeans’, a pointless catcalling game initiated by Europhiles.

      zorro

    • uanime5
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

      Those benefits would be the west retuning to a situation of close cooperation and and a realignment rightwards of economic and social policies as wealth creation once again would be seen as the necessary cornerstone of defeating the likes of Putin.

      Ah yes the wealth creation policies where workers lose all their rights so that companies can make greater profits. Given that those are the very conditions to start a communist revolution perhaps a different set of policies will defeat Putin.

      • libertarian
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

        Uanime5

        If companies didn’t make greater profits where would the money come from, to pay more wages, hire more people, invest in research and development and to pay the tax to keep people such as yourself from bothering to work at all?

        All organisations whether for profit, CIC’s or charities need to make a profit that is an excess of income over expenditure in order to survive. The fact that socialists don’t understand simple principles like this speaks volumes

  4. Mike Stallard
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 6:33 am | Permalink

    If the British Government had behaved like the EUSSR, I would now be expecting resignations. The behaviour of Baroness Ashton of Upholland as High Representative of the European Union has been quite incredible. To see (twice) a foreign minister rioting in the streets of a foreign country when they have not got the wherewithal to support their action beggars belief. The Russians have seen how ridiculous she looks.

    As Britain and the USA slowly fade out as world powers (they are terribly in debt and President Obama is not skilled in foreign policy) others will take our place. But who?

    • stred
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      It seems odd that a US credit rating agency has downgraded Russia to a low level when the US has a national debt to GDP of 104% and the UK 90%, but Russia has one of 14%. Other EU countries have even higher debt ratios. Russia is vastly larger than EU countries and has enormous natural resources and technological skills.

      The agency seems to be the same one which was rating various banks highly just before the baning crash. JR, as an ex-banker, can you explain?

      • zorro
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

        Stred, that tells you all you need to know about credit rating agencies…… Pure propaganda being driven through a compliant media to try and drum up Cold War type fears. It is utterly ridiculous to compare modern Russia with the Soviet Union. As I said before, the US hawks have been looking to get Russia because of their opposition to Syria and the hawks humiliation at their proposals not being endorsed.

        zorro

        • Stred
          Posted April 27, 2014 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

          Zorro. John doesn’t seem to have any quick answers to the credit rating question. It occured to me that the reason behind the great interest of the EU and US, indeed competion between the two if Mrs Newlands words are to be understood, is the large potential of Ukranian resources. The EU commissioners and Greens must be looking with envy at all those biomass/cornfields, which are the largest after the US, where it is already big business. Baronette Ashford would surely not have understood this and, as an ex-pacifist CND apparatchick must be regretting the loss of life caused by this adventure, only a year before an election.

          • uanime5
            Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:58 pm | Permalink

            The EU commissioners and Greens must be looking with envy at all those biomass/cornfields, which are the largest after the US, where it is already big business.

            Given that Ukraine is the 46th largest country in the world it seems unlikely that they have the largest biomass/cornfields after the US.

            As Ukraine isn’t a member of the UN International Biofuels Forum it’s clear that they lack any major biofuel sites.

          • stred
            Posted April 28, 2014 at 8:07 am | Permalink

            Ay present Ukraine has 30% of the rich black soil in the world and is the biggest producer of sunflower oil. Agriculture is the only major asset which has not been privatised. If it joins the EU, how long until it joins your forum and grows what the EU policy dictates? re Wiki.

    • Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:34 am | Permalink

      China is building its gold reserves, keeping all of its own considerable production, buying in more on the market and buying up gold mines around the world.

      One day we could see a Chinese world reserve currency backed by gold. Where would that leave all other fiat currencies? Where would that leave the Dollar?

      The Chinese are also steadily building their armed forces.

      The West, on the other hand cannot afford to run its armed forces at previous levels and, whereas China has gold, the west is being left with paper.

      • zorro
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

        I am afraid that this is what worries me about the Western powers. I fear that, in reality, they want to provoke a large conflict to try and control/break up emerging nations.

        zorro

        • Anonymous
          Posted April 27, 2014 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

          Now would be the time, Zorro.

    • Antisthenes
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:25 am | Permalink

      “Baroness Ashton”.

      Put a lefty in charge of anything especially one who exudes incompetence but then don’t they all then you know the consequences are going to be dire.

      • APL
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

        Antisthenes: “Put a lefty in charge of anything especially one ..”

        Bet you she isn’t in charge. She is the sort of biddable person who meekly does what he/she is told and happily takes all the money thrown at him/her not to cause trouble.

  5. Gina Dean
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    The Security seat s that France and the UK hold must be protected by every means from the EU. If they amalgamate them and take over the seats it will be the thin edge of the wedge. Our goverments should hang their heads in shame for giving over so much control to external agency’s.

    • ian wragg
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

      Gina, call me Dave’s first job when forming the coalition was to decimate our armed forces and get rid of hardware that should have been kept in reserve. This fits perfectly well with his vision of an all powerful Eu with its own armed forces and foreign policy.
      What’s the betting when the new carriers are ready they bare fitted out with Mirage or Raphael fighters controlled by the French. The mans a tosser of the first order and the sooner he is in opposition the better.
      BTW Christopher Bookers piece in todays Telegraph should be compulsory reading for all the Westminster idiots. Davey has never spouted so much rubbish.
      He should be brought before a Parliamentary Commission for lying.

  6. alan jutson
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    Not much to add to your sensible comments John.

    But on another topic.
    I see Russian aircraft were probing UK airspace via Scotland last week, as they have done for many years (and probably more times than we know).

    The Russian Navy has also been playing the same game with our waters

    The RAF from their Scottish base escorted them away as usual, as did the Royal Navy from their Scottish port.

    What if Scotland were independent, who would be responsible for that same air space and water, who would protect and pay for it to be protected.

    Does Mr Salmond think that we (the rest of what is left of the UK) should automatically defend such at no cost to the Scottish people ?.

    Does he even care !

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

      As do the UK and US in relation to Russian and Chinese airspace…..

      zorro

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

      I wouldn’t make this so personal about Salmond, who will not always be around.

      The wider reality is that once Scotland had reverted to being an independent sovereign state it would regain control of its foreign and defence policies, rather than having them set by the UK Parliament as now, and that would be for an unlimited period, and there would always be the possibility that at some point during that unlimited future Scotland would get a government which was hostile to the continuing UK and set its foreign and defence policies accordingly.

      If a Scottish government chose to make an alliance with a potential enemy of the continuing UK and allow that other country to have military bases on its territory then there would be no longer be any legal bar to it doing that.

      • alan jutson
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 7:31 am | Permalink

        Dennis

        Not making it personal about Mr Salmond, but he is the one pulling the strings at the moment, he is the one who we (our Government) may perhaps have to negotiate with.
        Thus he is the man who will make the demands or refuse to agree on so many aspects, treaties, agreements and financial matters should Scotland vote for independence.

        Indeed I think Mr Salmon will wipe the floor with our Governments negotiation team, should any negotiations ever happen.

  7. The PrangWizard
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    I am in total support of this analysis. It is a potentially dangerous situation which will only be made worse by the EU’s empire building and other Western posturing and threats, especially those coming from the warmongering types like the US Secretary of State’s John Kerry, who represents the US at its worst. Clearly the EU and the US is intent on destabilising Russia and removing the current leadership.

    The UK must become more independent in its foreign policies, we must develop a long-term strategy to decouple ourselves from the strangle-hold the US has over us, and become far more self-reliant, as well of course as getting out of the EU altogether.

    Our leaders must regain some of our long-lost dignity. We should stop trying to look big by hanging around with the biggest noise in the playground.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

      I see that Kerry’s scaremongering about a letter mentioning restrictions against Jews has been shone to be less than convincing……. How about the chemical weapons incident in Ghouta too?

      zorro

  8. Alan
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

    In my view nothing that the EU has done in any way excuses Russia sending soldiers into the Crimea or the rest of the Ukraine. I think it is wrong to write anything that demonstrates any sympathy for Russia’s aggression.

    To use this aggression as a vehicle for criticising the EU’s policy towards the Ukraine is, in my view, to demonstrate a lack of a perspective on international affairs. There is no way in which the EU’s approaches to the Ukraine, which would at most have resulted in the EU providing financial and other assistance to the Ukraine, can be equated to, or provide an excuse for, Russia’s use of special forces to destabilise what was an independent country.

    I agree we should not be contemplating military action over the Ukraine, but I think Mr Obama is right to reinforce US forces in NATO countries that border on Russia or that have large Russian speaking residents that Russia might use as an excuse to cause disruption. Russia has demonstrated for the second time in the last few years that it will use military force to expand its territory. It is unlikely to stop now.

    • stred
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

      As a long standing anti-communist, I now watch the news by flicking between adjacent stations. RT and Al Jaz often seem to have more interesting reports and discussions then British MSM, backed up by pictures which would be very hard to fabricate. I have also noticed that the BBC has started to send Russian speaking reporters into regional cities to interview people in the barricaded parts, described by the Ukrainian ex- rebel government as ‘terrorists’. It seems obvious that they are not and some reporters agree.. They are Russians living in the Ukraine, as they have done for centuries, and are rebels who do not like the other rebels backed by the US and EU and unable to disarm the (people ed) they used to force out the elected president. They also disliked him, as they disliked the other corrupt presidents and cronies. They do not even wish to be part of Russia, but have their own regional government.

      Similarly, in the Crimea, large numbers of Russian troops were already there in and around their leased bases. The referendum result was far more certain than most EU referenda and, if repeated, would still be so. The largely Russian population preferred to be with Russia. Had the EU/US not backed the rebellion, they would still be in the Ukraine. Should we punish Russia or invade to force them to rejoin?

  9. John Coles
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    I find it utterly humiliating to see Baroness Ashton purporting to represent my county’s interests in her capacity of EU panjandrum. She and her fellow EU-expansionists have caused this crisis – noteworthy that the President of the Ukraine is always flanked by an EU flag (the cursed ring of stars) whenever he is interviewed.
    Incidentally, Mr Redwood, when you refer to “UK People”, would that be the British?

    Reply Our country is the UK which includes Northern Ireland with Great Britain.

  10. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    I suppose we are ready to take in a vast number of refugees. I mean somebody somewhere has thought this situation through. Tweak a Climate Change model or two to suit?

    Meanwhile the triggers increment further forward toward release.

    I’m waiting to see non Russian aircraft appear as the Ukrainian military depletes its spares + a few grenade launchers hitting home. Perhaps with RT slowly being evicted it will be left to the BBC/CNN not to show such sensitive things?

    If this was anything to do with bigging up the EU around the elections I am sure that Bullhorn has been seriously blunted…I hope so anyway.

  11. Jennifer A
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    Little interest in Ukraine ?

    But they are our neighbours. They are now on our border !

    • bigneil
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

      And no doubt if there is an escalation of the problem there , there will be loads leave for the only safe place – here – for their free everything life at the taxpayers expense. Oh how I wish I had the amount of money this govt thinks I have.

  12. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    A sober and sensible examination of the situation. Once again your views are directly opposed to those of your leader, the Prime Minister, and Foreign Secretary Hague. Just how can you stomach supporting a party led by people who reject so many of your opinions?

    • John Coles
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 10:02 am | Permalink

      Leaves me puzzled, too.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

      And some people wonder why JR is not in the cabinet!

      zorro

    • margaret brandreth-j
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

      Because John is a conservative and was conservative before many others?

  13. formula57
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    Sound views on Ukraine etc. but as for “I do want a UK independent of an EU foreign policy to remain as a member of the UN Security Council” is it not past time that our humble service to the international community should allow us to depart in peace and rest from our labours?

    The UK has been pulling others’ chestnuts out of the fire for too long. Granted it was often times also promoting its own interests and until Blair it did so without the repugnant veneer of self-righteousness and the pure folly of expecting gratitude. A more modest role, more congruent with our economic clout, might allow the UK to look to its own problems rather than devoting effort and resource to interfering in those more properly the domain of far away countries of which we know little.

  14. David Murfin
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    To be very pessimistic, if Russia simply turned off the gas and moved its forces westward through Ukraine, how far would they get before USA intervened, and what would USA do?

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

      Let’s face it, if Russia was the monster it is being portrayed as, it would have done all this long ago. Mr Putin seems very patient. There is only one side stepping up the Cold War media rhetoric and it isn’t Russia……

      zorro

    • A different Simon
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

      I think it’s very unlikely Russia will do much other than ensure Ukraine remains part of their sphere of influence . They could just as easily take East Germany back but won’t .

      Whatever the US does (or more likely doesn’t do) it would likely have very little impact on the US itself .

      I’m very impressed by the advances in extracting oil and gas from tight resources which have been pioneered in the U.S.

      I’ve also realised for some time that exporting this technology is as much about foreign policy as anything else .

      Germany seems to realise this only too well and has the sense not to antagonise their Eastern neighbour too far .

      Germany have all but banned hydraulic fracturing ostensibly for a load of baloney reasons which don’t stand up to even cursory inspection ; eg supposed environmental impact .
      This all whilst they are bulldozing hundreds of villages and medieval hamlets in their dash for open cast lignite coal .

      The underlying problem seems to be that Russia needs to find it’s place in the world in the 21st century .

      Either Russia builds itself a more balanced economy less dependent on exports of hydrocarbons and other natural resources or things will get worse .

      • uanime5
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

        I think it’s very unlikely Russia will do much other than ensure Ukraine remains part of their sphere of influence . They could just as easily take East Germany back but won’t .

        I doubt Russia would be able to take back East Germany, especially since the Germans and all the countries in between don’t want to be vassals of Russia.

        Germany have all but banned hydraulic fracturing ostensibly for a load of baloney reasons which don’t stand up to even cursory inspection ; eg supposed environmental impact .

        What about fracking’s failure of reduce gas prices in Poland? That clearly shows that in some countries fracking isn’t economically viable.

        • A different Simon
          Posted April 28, 2014 at 6:59 am | Permalink

          Germany produces a lot of gas and almost all it’s wells have been frac’d .

          The results in Poland do not clearly show that frac’ing shale formations is not economically viable with current technology for the whole country , only selected regions within the country .

          Within the next couple of months BNK Petroleum will stimulate one third of the horizontal lateral they have added to Gapowa well in the Baltic Basin .

          Commercial flows would derisk a quarter of a million acres around it .

          If the Germans and shale gas/tight oil protestors elsewhere were so certain shale could not be produced economically there would be no need in legislating or protesting against it .

  15. Tad Davison
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    I am convinced there is malicious intent on the part of the west, and I don’t support them at all. The USA is in my view, not a democracy, nor champions of it, but an expansionist oligarchy run by an elite, for an elite. They totally misjudged Russia and its leader Vladimir Putin when they stirred up trouble in Ukraine with the willing help of the EU. The United States’ real and underlying aim is to eliminate Russia’s presence in the Black Sea, which would then allow them to continue their ‘containment’ of Russia, in direct violation of the agreements that were signed after the break-up of the old Soviet Union. Just look at the missile shield that now encircles Russia and ask, would we in the UK not be concerned if the roles were reversed?

    Putin might not be to everyone’s taste, but at least he’s got the backbone to say thus far, and no further! And if he stands up to this US tyranny, with the help of the American people, we might just be able to reverse and defeat it.

    It would have been so easy and a far better solution, to gradually bring Russia into the fold as a trading partner and an equal, but the neo-cons in Washington weren’t having any of that! World domination is their aim, and they don’t want anything to stand in their way.

    Study US history, especially since world war two, and it’s fairly clear to see that they interfere and start wars wherever they can, and on the most fallacious grounds, even inventing pretexts for armed intervention (example – see the Gulf of Tonkin and the USS Maddox).

    There is a growing and influential band of people within the US itself who are not persuaded that the actions of successive US governments are wholly legitimate, but there’s a positive clamour of protest outside the US against US foreign policy, and given how the US routinely ignores international laws when it suits them, I am not in the least surprised so many people have a bitter antithesis towards it – me included!

    The British government under Cameron and Hague don’t exactly come out of this smelling of roses either. Their actions and rhetoric prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the UK is just the USA’s poodle. What their master commands, the British government will do.

    And mark my words, China is watching this situation intensely, because they know that sooner or later, they’re next. Just look at the provocative and totally unnecessary over-flights of disputed territories by US B52′s, and the build-up of US naval forces in the area.

    I don’t want to see World War 3, and as former US defence secretary, Robert McNamara once said, the best way, is not to start one in the first place. But these nutters will stop at nothing, unless they themselves are stopped, and we in the UK have hitched our horse to this wagon for longer than is good for our health. It is about time we saw just what a criminal aggregation there is in Washington, and acted on our own best interested, not that of a bunch of crooks.

    Tad Davison

    Cambridge

  16. Andyvan
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    It absolutely amazes me that so many people believe that Russia is to blame in Ukraine. America and the EU supported a putsch by far right groups in which a democratically elected (admittedly corrupt and incompetent) government was overthrown. They used “self determination” as an excuse to support these (rebels ed). Then when Crimean and other eastern provinces of Ukraine decided that they should have self determination as well the Washington gang and their EU puppet states, ably supported by their craven media, demonize Russia . This whole crisis has been manufactured by Washington to eject Russia from the Black Sea and allow NATO bases to be built closer to Moscow. Wake up- the world isn’t like the BBC tell you it is. Western governments are almost always the aggressors not defenders of freedom.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      This is the power of the media with constant propaganda from the BBC and EU sponsored media. Fortunately, more probing people can see through this for what it is, and we can only hope that the number keeps on growing. Until then, we will not have truly accountable government. We are being treated like mushrooms……

      zorro

    • A different Simon
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

      They are exploiting Russian weakness of an unbalanced economy and over dependence on export of hydrocarbons .

      I wish I could work out why .

      All they had to do was keep giving Mr Putin and his mates more rope and the place would disintegrate of it’s own accord .

      There was no need for the EU to provoke Putin by trying to recruit Ukraine .

    • uanime5
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

      America and the EU supported a putsch by far right groups in which a democratically elected (admittedly corrupt and incompetent) government was overthrown. They used “self determination” as an excuse to support these (rebels ed).

      Well these rebels did let the Ukrainian parliament chose an interim president, rather than declare themselves rulers of Ukraine.

      Then when Crimean and other eastern provinces of Ukraine decided that they should have self determination as well the Washington gang and their EU puppet states, ably supported by their craven media, demonize Russia .

      Well these parts of Ukraine didn’t want to become part of Russia until Russia sent thousands of armed soldiers into them and made them vote on this a few days later.

      This whole crisis has been manufactured by Washington to eject Russia from the Black Sea and allow NATO bases to be built closer to Moscow.

      How is this going to remove Russia from the Black Sea when part of Russia still borders the Black Sea (the part above Georgia)? Also Finland and Poland already border Russia so NATO could already build bases right next to Russia. Thus both of your arguments are without merit.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 7:59 am | Permalink

        ‘Well these parts of Ukraine didn’t want to become part of Russia until Russia sent thousands of armed soldiers into them and made them vote on this a few days later.’

        Your drivel is tolerated because we all know how brainwashed you are, and because JR and his readers believe in free speech. Your presence serves to constantly remind us that we are right. Even the (foolish ed) should be listened to.

        In keeping with so many other unthinking lefties, you are so one-sided with your pro-EU, pro Labour bilge, you won’t even entertain an alternative point of view, but to tell absolute porkies is another thing entirely. You distort the facts so much, you must surely only get your news from domestic UK sources like the BBC, or maybe from such places as Fox News or CNN where the truth is so badly reported.

        No-one in the Crimea was forced to vote for annexation at the point of a gun. The people voted to become part of Russia because Russia offered prosperity, where the westward-looking Ukraine who would shackle itself to the EU, could only ever offer misery and hardship.

        The pictures don’t lie, nor do the testimonies of ordinary citizens. If only western media chose to show them. There was never any question of coercion.

        And do you really believe your own rhetoric about the USA and NATO not wanting to remove the Russians from the Black Sea?

        I’ll tell you quite categorically, it is because of the mentality of people like you, that fail to go out and research the facts, that we find ourselves in this mess. It is precisely what the likes of McCain and Kerry depend upon. Gullible doesn’t even come close to describing your point of view. At least when we research something, as is self-evident from the many posts I read on this blog, we do it with an even hand and take our information from both the left, and the right and properly evaluate it. But all is not lost. I’m sure your condition can be treated with a slice of humble pie, washed down with a good dose of honesty.

  17. Bert Young
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    Dr JR , your post this morning is extremely well argued and I fully agree with the points you have raised . EU posturing in the Ukraine is a grave mistake and an illustration of poor strategic thinking . The Russian position is entirely understandable given the common language and recent historical relationship they have in Eastern Ukraine . The matter should be left to the ballot box in the Ukraine with due regard to regional differences . Diplomatic relations with Russia is the only way forward ; the USA have a key role to play – I only wish they were better skilled in the way they go about things .

  18. Denis Cooper
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    Clearly the EU’s “post-imperial imperial” territorial ambitions do not stop with Ukraine, that would just be en route to the Caucasus and across the Caspian Sea to Central Asia.

    And at no time would the British people be directly consulted about this; in fact it has now been enshrined in Section 4(4)(c) of the so-called “referendum lock” law that we will never have a referendum of whether we want a new country to join the EU.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

      Yes, forget ‘extending the EU to the Urals and beyond’, Cameron would probably want to extend it to Uranus!

      zorro

  19. Max unbar
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    Why mention Sir Menzies Campbell, an MP for probably the most despised party in British politics at present?
    We have heard nothing from him concerning the far more important issue, to Britain, of the break-up of our own country and threat of ‘part of the USSR recreated by bluff or force’ within our own borders. He represents a Scottish central belt constituency and should therefore have no inhibitions in attacking Salmond and his subversive far-Left allies. Or is Sir Ming of that ilk himself? Having witnessed the nauseating spectacle of a sycophantic Lib-Dem election candidate praising the work of the SNP this would not surprise me.

    However much we may wish to imagine that Ukraine is an independent country, the reality is that it is and has been effectively part of the Russian Empire. The delusion of the West was that things had changed for ever and that Russia was no longer a threat to us. This foolish assumption has led to the progressive reduction in our ability to defend ourselves militarily but, more seriously, a decline in our political judgement. This can be seen clearly in the polls that you mention when Conservative and UKIP voters rate the EU lower than Russia; and by extension this low rating applies to our own leaders. The Right in Britain envy Russia and its seemingly powerful patriotic leader.

  20. yulwaymartyn
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    JR – is this the Tory response to the appalling rise of UKIP?

    When is your party going to get out there and start taking on this ghastly man and its loathsome policies? Do something man. Before your party sinks below the waves.

    • Max Dunbar
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

      Sounds as if UKIP must be an exciting and dangerous band of brothers. How much is the membership fee and is free bus pass included?

      • yulwaymartyn
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 9:11 am | Permalink

        Max. I think yours is a very good description. UKIP – exciting and dangerous.

    • Jennifer A
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 10:52 pm | Permalink

      Yulwaymartin – Mr Cameron ought to be prepared take Mr Farage on in a public debate. A fairly and evenly conducted one of course, preferably with no audience.

      The Tory party sinking below the waves ?

      I’m of the opinion that puncturing the right flotation chamber of the Lib/Lab/Con rubber dinghy might reconnect millions of hitherto unrepresented voters.

      I ask you kindly to moderate your tone as regards to people of a different opinion to your own. I intend to vote UKIP and in so far as I know I have never expressed myself in such a strident way as you have here.

      • Jennifer A
        Posted April 27, 2014 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

        Continuing the nautical theme.

        The highly regarded (by me) Mr Redwood has only a little while to jump ship of his own accord.

        • yulwaymartyn
          Posted April 28, 2014 at 9:09 am | Permalink

          Jennifer. I agree with you on this. How can one remain a member of the Tory party in the light of such progress by UKIP. ? The Tory response seems to be deafening silence.

    • A different Simon
      Posted April 28, 2014 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      Yulwaymartyn ,

      Am I missing the irony here or do you really find Mr Farage ghastly and UKIP’s policies loathsome ?

      If so why ?

  21. Con
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    Absolutely agree.
    What really worries me is who or what is the EU?
    As I understand it none of the major EU countries wants to be involved in the Ukraine, so exactly who is driving the EU? Is it Barroso and Rumpy Pumpy?
    At least I know who is driving Russia. The EU is out of control and no longer represents the people.

    • ian wragg
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

      The Eu never represented or represents the people. Just the jumped up megalomaniacs like Blair, Barosso Rumpy Pumpy and of course CMD tagging along with his mate Vague in the van.

  22. NickW
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    It is becoming increasingly obvious that the politicians are out of touch with public opinion on the matter of Ukraine and the EU’s territorial ambitions.

    This is because those members of the public who wish to inform themselves have access to a huge source of balanced information via the Internet.

    Our Foreign Secretary, on the other hand, has his sources of information restricted to a single point of view which is shared only by an inward looking clique.

    As with Iraq, there is an increasingly horrible feeling from the public that the politicians in the West are no longer the “good” guys.

    The internet makes it increasingly impossible for politicians to be able to tell the electorate what they think, and as a result politicians are losing what little respect the public had for them.
    I hope that Mr Redwood’s views are shared by our Government, but I fear that they are not, and that the USA is a determined war monger with a dominant and unhealthy influence over our politicians.

    • Stred
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

      The ordinary US citizen doesn’t seem to be taken in by the political class any more than Europeans or anyone else with internet access.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

      The next question you have to ask is why is that, and what seeming hold do they have over our politicians?

      zorro

  23. forthurst
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    It is absolutely clear that the US Neocon/NATO/EU policy has been to foment a putsch in Ukraine in order to expel Russia from its Crimean base, to further encircle Russia with yet more military bases, and to plunder the territory of the Ukraine for its natural resources including agricultural land. In the circumstances, it is hardly surprising that Russia moved quickly to deploy troops already based in Sevastopol to picket the airports to deter a surprise land based attack on their base; that this did not provoke a reaction from the putschists encouraged Russia to deploy further pickets to public buildings and to then ensure that by means of an early referendum, the Crimeans would be able to escape from Ukraine, an ambition they had harboured since independence; but that was not an invasion, it was simply a case of first mover’s advantage leaving the putschists uncertain how Russia or their own troops would react if they attempted to evict the Russian peacekeepers.

    Now the situation in Ukraine has predictably deteriorated as the putschists have deployed trainloads of military materiel and extreme force Eastward. It is not clear what the putschists’ deployments are; the regular Ukrainian army seems lukewarm about a civil war, but those who have actively engaged in killing civilians in the East appear to be either Right Sector, newly recruited ‘Interior Ministry’ militiamen or even Blackwater mercenaries.

    Sir Menzies Campbell obviously was not paying attention when there was a negotiated settlement at the UN in which the west agreed with Russia that the putschists would disarm the Right Sector and not use militiary force against those in the East who hold the entirely legitimate belief that the putschists have no legitimacy as a government.

    The dismemberment of those remnants of the USSR which had been part of the Czarist Empire was orchestrated by the drunken Yeltsin who also orchestrated the transfer of soviet enterprises to bandits, all encouraged and cheered by the ‘West’; it is hardly surprising that when a sober patriot came to power, he would address some of the damage inflicted on Russia by his predecessor. Ukraine does not appear to be a viable entity; the industrial centres in the South and East have always been populated by Russian speakers and may not voluntarily accept domination by a ‘Western’ puppet government that appears to wish to expel them from their homeland by using terrorism.

    • zorro
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

      It could be a viable state if there was some understanding between the residents. However, the forces of extremism who appear to have power in Kiev, as well as being seemingly incompetent, have also been making threats against Russian speakers….. http://rt.com/news/minority-language-law-ukraine-035/

      zorro

    • uanime5
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

      It is absolutely clear that the US Neocon/NATO/EU policy has been to foment a putsch in Ukraine in order to expel Russia from its Crimean base, to further encircle Russia with yet more military bases, and to plunder the territory of the Ukraine for its natural resources including agricultural land.

      And what exactly is your source for this conspiracy theory?

      that this did not provoke a reaction from the putschists encouraged Russia to deploy further pickets to public buildings

      The Ukrainian Parliament did object to Russia sending thousands of unmarked soldiers into Ukraine.

      to then ensure that by means of an early referendum, the Crimeans would be able to escape from Ukraine, an ambition they had harboured since independence

      When exactly had the Crimeans wanted to become part of Russia? I trust you’re not going to claim that a referendum conducted while thousands of Russian soldiers were occupying this region constitute a free and fair representation of the people’s wishes.

      but that was not an invasion, it was simply a case of first mover’s advantage leaving the putschists uncertain how Russia or their own troops would react if they attempted to evict the Russian peacekeepers.

      Sending thousands of unmarked soldiers into another country is an invasion and illegal under the rules regarding warfare. The Russian soldiers also aren’t peacekeepers because before they invaded Ukraine was peaceful.

      Now the situation in Ukraine has predictably deteriorated as the putschists have deployed trainloads of military materiel and extreme force Eastward.

      No the situation has deteriorated because Russia keeps sending their soldiers into Ukraine. That’s why the Ukrainian army has been dispatched to the east.

      but those who have actively engaged in killing civilians in the East appear to be either Right Sector, newly recruited ‘Interior Ministry’ militiamen or even Blackwater mercenaries.

      And you know this how exactly?

      Sir Menzies Campbell obviously was not paying attention when there was a negotiated settlement at the UN in which the west agreed with Russia that the putschists would disarm the Right Sector and not use militiary force against those in the East who hold the entirely legitimate belief that the putschists have no legitimacy as a government.

      When was this agreed? Was Russia also required to withdraw from Ukraine?

      I suspect you just made this up because the putschists aren’t part of the Ukrainian government.

      Ukraine does not appear to be a viable entity

      Based on what evidence? It was doing fine after independence from Russia until Russia invaded them.

      the industrial centres in the South and East have always been populated by Russian speakers and may not voluntarily accept domination by a ‘Western’ puppet government that appears to wish to expel them from their homeland by using terrorism.

      How does speaking Russia make you hostile to the West? How is the Ukrainians government a ” ‘Western’ puppet government” when it was chosen by the Ukrainian parliament, which was elected by Ukrainians?

      forthurst your entire post makes it clear that you know nothing about what is happening in Ukraine.

      • forthurst
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 11:27 am | Permalink

        uanime5: “forthurst your entire post makes it clear that you know nothing about what is happening in Ukraine.”

        I am not wasting my time refuting US Neocon/NATO/EU propaganda which has been filling the MSM, together with the usual made up nonsense we have come to anticipate; either you’re interested in the truth or you are not: you are clearly not.

      • zorro
        Posted April 28, 2014 at 11:29 am | Permalink

        uanime5, why don’t you try and look at a map or read some historical ego-political books rather than labelling people as ‘conspiracy theorists’ because they might think that your arguments are a load of old guff.

        Your answer shows your lack of knowledge of Russian agreements with Ukraine regarding troops in Crimea, and you always speak so arrogantly whilst usually being so wrong. When do you ever quote sources….extremely rarely in my experience.

        You seem to have forgot that the new Ukrainian government has banned the use of Russian as an official language too.

        zorro

        • zorro
          Posted April 28, 2014 at 11:32 am | Permalink

          Geo political is what I meant, I’m sure that you’ve probably read some ego political ones too. On a general point, please forgive my misspellings which occur, but it is the IPAD I am using which seems to have a mind of its own!

          zorro

  24. bigneil
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    I find it rather strange john that in the title you used the term EUSR -to me that says a hell of a lot.

    Reply I voted for Out in 1975 and have opposed all the main moves to more centralisation, so why your surprise?

  25. zorro
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27180651

    Oh, here we go…… The Foreign Secretary comes out with his opinion on trade sanctions against Russia and the potential negative effect on the UK……’price worth paying’….. Now where have I heard that phrase before?….. Good to see that the UK’s national interest is in safe hands……

    zorro

    • alan jutson
      Posted April 27, 2014 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

      “A price worth paying”

      So easy to say when THEY are not paying the price, and THEIR staff and THEIR workers are not going to be out of a job because the government refuse to allow someone else’s business to sell products to a particular market.

      I wonder if the HM Customs and Excise will allow Companies extra time to pay any taxes due because of such Government policy, or indeed if the Banks will extend any loan conditions due to overstocking of raw materials and products.

      Do these politicians have a clue as to the knock on effects of their decisions on others.

      A price worth paying ?

      Talk is cheap.

  26. uanime5
    Posted April 27, 2014 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    EU pressure helped lead to the removal of the elected President from power in the Ukraine

    I’d say it was more to do with his corruption and unpopularity among Ukrainians.

    which has allowed Russia to question the legality and authority of the interim Ukrainian government that replaced him.

    Well perhaps Russia should be calling for new elections, rather than sending thousands of soldiers into Ukraine and trying to annex as much as possible.

    The best we could do is to urge the EU to be less provocative, and to cease supporting the interim Ukrainian regime.

    How is that going to make the situation any better? If the EU stops supporting Ukraine then Russia will send more troops into it.

    It would be better for the EU to await the election of a new government

    Why can’t we support the interim government until this happens? It was chosen by the democratically elected Ukrainian parliament so it’s a legitimate government.

    All your plan of doing nothing until after the next election will result in is more of Ukraine being annexed by Russia and any election being delayed by Russia so they’ll have more time to annex Ukraine. The EU’s decision to support the current Ukrainian government until a new one can be elected and trying to stop Russian aggression is the correct decision.

    Reply Then why isn’t it working?

  27. sjb
    Posted April 28, 2014 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    JR wrote: In his [Lord Ashcroft's] poll where 10 is very positive and zero is very negative, [Westminster Parliament scored 4.61,] Russia scored 4.07, the EU 4.00 and the European Parliament 3.5.

    I wonder if the score for the European Parliament is because only 23% claim to “feel” they know either a “great deal” or “quite a lot” about the institution?
    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2014/03/europe-trial/

  28. Terry
    Posted April 28, 2014 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    With the EU and its proposed future direction, I see George Orwell’s classic, 1984, when Big Brother will be watching all of us. Scary for our offspring and probably 40 years later than anticipated but inevitable, unless we stop it, NOW!

  29. Robert Taggart
    Posted April 28, 2014 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    USSR ? or EUSR ?
    Neither – either ! But…
    Ukraine or Russia ? – UKRAINE – support the underdog !

  30. fkc
    Posted April 28, 2014 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    How I agree with all that you say John. We cannot let this country be overtaken by stealth as seems evident in the current status. If most of our laws come from Brussels we are a bit hampered. Please keep us up to speed on the continuing situation.

  31. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted April 28, 2014 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    The most constructive thing we can do is to put on record our disagreement with the EU policy enunciated by Herr von Rumpey and Baroness Ashton. “Not in our name” is what Messrs Cameron and Hague should be saying.

    There are two main choices open to the Ukraine. One choice is to remain neutral, that is not to join NATO and not to apply for full EU Membership. That would guarantee that a United Ukraine would not threaten Russian security, the key need. Ukraine would be free to negotiate trade deals worldwide.

    The other choice is to insist on joining NATO or the EU or both. Russia would then encourage revolution and civil war, leading to partition of the existing Ukraine. Partition along what border? That’s why there would be a civil war.

  32. Kermie
    Posted August 2, 2014 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    Perfect anaysis, Mr Redwood, but can you sell your ideas to Mr Cameron and get him to pipe down the anti Russian rhetoric?

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College, and has a DPhil from All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.
  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page