A Fiasco Shared is a Fiasco Re-Focused
The Minister of Unfitness for Purpose is going to enlighten our partners in Europe about dealing with terrorism. It appears that the five other largest EU countries will suffer terrorist blowback from the Special Relationship's various adventures in the Muslim world unless they emulate our approach here on the mainland. The Minister will recommend "constant political oversight", something a Ministry of Unfitness for Purpose ought to be good for, if nothing else.
"The re-focused Home Office draws on British conditions but it also addresses global changes and challenges in today's world," the Minister will say. What changes and challenges? Well: "Our considered view, which is based on hard analysis" of something or other, "is that we face a seamless challenge", whatever that may mean; still it sounds jolly challenging, "with a threat that crosses defence, foreign and domestic affairs." Of course, IRA terrorism also involved defence, foreign and domestic affairs; but the IRA challenge had seams, it seems.
Anyway, the solution is "to integrate our counter-terrorism effort at a strategic, operational and tactical level", which will be achieved by "re-focusing" the Home Office, much as a grapefruit is "re-focused" when sliced down the middle. If only everything in life were so simple.
The result is "not a US homeland security ministry and nor is it Continental European ministry of justice and ministry of interior split", neither of which would have drawn sufficiently on British conditions. After all, a US homeland security ministry might well involve giving up the right of habeas corpus, while a Continental European approach could mean a lot of nonsense like identity cards. "Neither of these approaches fit our British historical legacy, but nor are they sufficient for the 21st century security challenges as we see them," the Minister will expostulate helpfully.
He will also inform his cultural inferiors that, in case they hadn't realised it, "the fight against terror is about security and liberty rather than a choice between the two".
"The re-focused Home Office draws on British conditions but it also addresses global changes and challenges in today's world," the Minister will say. What changes and challenges? Well: "Our considered view, which is based on hard analysis" of something or other, "is that we face a seamless challenge", whatever that may mean; still it sounds jolly challenging, "with a threat that crosses defence, foreign and domestic affairs." Of course, IRA terrorism also involved defence, foreign and domestic affairs; but the IRA challenge had seams, it seems.
Anyway, the solution is "to integrate our counter-terrorism effort at a strategic, operational and tactical level", which will be achieved by "re-focusing" the Home Office, much as a grapefruit is "re-focused" when sliced down the middle. If only everything in life were so simple.
The result is "not a US homeland security ministry and nor is it Continental European ministry of justice and ministry of interior split", neither of which would have drawn sufficiently on British conditions. After all, a US homeland security ministry might well involve giving up the right of habeas corpus, while a Continental European approach could mean a lot of nonsense like identity cards. "Neither of these approaches fit our British historical legacy, but nor are they sufficient for the 21st century security challenges as we see them," the Minister will expostulate helpfully.
He will also inform his cultural inferiors that, in case they hadn't realised it, "the fight against terror is about security and liberty rather than a choice between the two".
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home