Nothing to Say
The Secretary of State for Lesser Breeds has been out demonstrating once more her capacity for saying nothing in a selection of different but yummy ways. Listeners to BBC Radio's Today programme were treated, in succession, to:
The all-purpose non-actionable nothing: Ms Beckett says that "we need to reassess whether change is needed", a process which presumably happens all the time in any case. If a situation is changeable, one must keep reassessing one's response to it. If a situation is unchanging, one must keep reassessing whether it ought to be changed, and if so, what must be done to change it. Nevertheless, the Guardian or the Press Association attempts to squeeze some dynamism out of this non-statement by headlining it as "We need to reassess Iraq policy, says Beckett".
The auto-repeating safety nothing: Ms Beckett reminded her interviewer that "the Iraq Study Group says there is no magic formula." By golly, that is just what the Government has been saying all along: there is no magic formula. If there were a magic formula, we may be assured that it would have been used by now. But there isn't one. If any opponent of Government policy had suggested that there were one, this particular nothing might acquire the force of denial if not actual rebuttal; but since the only magic formulae on display have been such soporific spellbinders as stay the course, do the job, universal values, draw a line under it and everyone's favourite, freedom and democracy, this particular nothing remains a nothing.
The national pride nothing: George W Bush having delayed an announcement on Iraq, it is necessary to indicate that the British government is not waiting for him to speak before it falls into line. "There are and will be discussions in our government and we will come to our own conclusions". When we fall into line, we shall dashed well fall into line of our own accord.
The nobler-versus-nasty nothing: Ms Beckett called for "an intensification in the process of reconciliation". The process of reconciliation has not been intense enough to satisfy the British government, so the intensity of the process must be stepped up. This is noble. On the other hand, the actions of Iraq's neighbours, none of which has yet starved, bombed, invaded, irradiated, occupied or robbed the country, are having "catastrophic" consequences, chief among which, it appears, is the general disinclination towards intensification of reconciliation. This is nasty.
The assurance of nothing: Ms Beckett insisted that a strong, stable Iraq, perhaps like Saddam Hussein's Iraq used to be, was "absolutely possible" and that, as regards the country breaking up, "there is nothing in the present circumstances that says that has to be the outcome."
To summarise, then: despite the catastrophe being imposed by Iraq's neighbours and the deplorable lack of intensity in the reconciliation process, and in the absence of a magic formula, there is an absolute possibility of stabilisation. As if that were not enough, Ms Beckett is unable to detect, in the present circumstances, any definite statement that fragmentation of the country is a necessary outcome of the said circumstances. Hence the need for a reassessment of the need for change, during which we shall come to our own conclusions. Keeping the mouth shut may be a slightly more dignified way of saying nothing; but keeping the mouth shut won't get you a ministry.
The all-purpose non-actionable nothing: Ms Beckett says that "we need to reassess whether change is needed", a process which presumably happens all the time in any case. If a situation is changeable, one must keep reassessing one's response to it. If a situation is unchanging, one must keep reassessing whether it ought to be changed, and if so, what must be done to change it. Nevertheless, the Guardian or the Press Association attempts to squeeze some dynamism out of this non-statement by headlining it as "We need to reassess Iraq policy, says Beckett".
The auto-repeating safety nothing: Ms Beckett reminded her interviewer that "the Iraq Study Group says there is no magic formula." By golly, that is just what the Government has been saying all along: there is no magic formula. If there were a magic formula, we may be assured that it would have been used by now. But there isn't one. If any opponent of Government policy had suggested that there were one, this particular nothing might acquire the force of denial if not actual rebuttal; but since the only magic formulae on display have been such soporific spellbinders as stay the course, do the job, universal values, draw a line under it and everyone's favourite, freedom and democracy, this particular nothing remains a nothing.
The national pride nothing: George W Bush having delayed an announcement on Iraq, it is necessary to indicate that the British government is not waiting for him to speak before it falls into line. "There are and will be discussions in our government and we will come to our own conclusions". When we fall into line, we shall dashed well fall into line of our own accord.
The nobler-versus-nasty nothing: Ms Beckett called for "an intensification in the process of reconciliation". The process of reconciliation has not been intense enough to satisfy the British government, so the intensity of the process must be stepped up. This is noble. On the other hand, the actions of Iraq's neighbours, none of which has yet starved, bombed, invaded, irradiated, occupied or robbed the country, are having "catastrophic" consequences, chief among which, it appears, is the general disinclination towards intensification of reconciliation. This is nasty.
The assurance of nothing: Ms Beckett insisted that a strong, stable Iraq, perhaps like Saddam Hussein's Iraq used to be, was "absolutely possible" and that, as regards the country breaking up, "there is nothing in the present circumstances that says that has to be the outcome."
To summarise, then: despite the catastrophe being imposed by Iraq's neighbours and the deplorable lack of intensity in the reconciliation process, and in the absence of a magic formula, there is an absolute possibility of stabilisation. As if that were not enough, Ms Beckett is unable to detect, in the present circumstances, any definite statement that fragmentation of the country is a necessary outcome of the said circumstances. Hence the need for a reassessment of the need for change, during which we shall come to our own conclusions. Keeping the mouth shut may be a slightly more dignified way of saying nothing; but keeping the mouth shut won't get you a ministry.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home