Richmond Park and the pro-Europe movement

When I got up yesterday and saw the result in Richmond Park I whooped and played Ode to Joy. I had been pessimistic. Out canvasing for Sarah Olney I had spent some time talking with one remain voter who thought Brexit would be a disaster but hated Olney making the by election about Brexit - “the referendum was so divisive”. Having had “traitor!” shouted at me while campaigning for remain, only days after the murder of Jo Cox, I sort of sympathized. But if many remain voters felt like that then Zac Goldsmith was safe. But hope trumped over fatalism in Richmond Park and Britain staying in the EU is back on the agenda.

Richmond Park was a Liberal Democrat victory but it wasn’t just a Liberal Democrat victory. Pro-Europe activists from across London came to help some helping the LibDems directly some working with Vote for Europe. The Greens stood down in Olney’s favor and even though the Labour Party put up a candidate many members disagreed to the extent that their candidate got less votes than members.

I’m not naive. I can see that any expression of gratitude for all that help doesn’t suit a party determined to claim momentum. It also makes sense for a party that hopes not just to win in areas that voted remain but to regain lost seats in Brexit voting areas are going quickly pivot calling the Richmond Park vote as not a vote for Europe but against “hard Brexit”. However lets call this out for what it is - dog whistle politics even if not as nasty a variety as that of Zac. Clegg and Farron are saying to remain voters ‘we are with you’ but to Brexit voters they are saying they are in favor of an improved Brexit. Clegg on Channel Four even talked about “sensible”. Okay, I hit replay and listening carefully I did hear “more sensible.” Sure, playing Russian Roulette is more sensible than blowing your brains out with a fully loaded revolver but there is nothing sensible about Brexit. A “soft” Brexit will be an unstable half way house in which Britain will still be adopting EU regulations but (where as now these are voted by British MEPs) we will have not say. The Brexiters were dishonest in claiming the regulations that are an essential part of a single market are undemocratic but under soft Brexit that will be true. A soft Brexit would only be acceptable as stop gap to give us time to persuade the British people that we need to again become a full member of the EU.

This does not apply to Sarah Olney who has committed herself to voting against Article 50 under all circumstances. Interesting the former MP for neighboring Kingston and Surbiton, Ed Davey who used to be rather bland has, since he left the Westminster bubble, found a harder edge expressing bitter opposition to Brexit. And it was still the right decision for pro-Europeans to back the Lib-Dems.

They are using pro-European Activists but we are using them. Richmond Park blows away the fatalism the feeling that there is no way of stepping back from the chaos that May’s Brexiters are leading us into. We need that victory.

The point is that relying on political parties alone will not stop Brexit. We need to be active in the pro-Europe organizations and win the argument as to why the EU maters. Then, when the political parties see the voters have moved, they will fall into line.

Bosnia, Kosovo and genocide

If Kosovo has the right to be independent why not Republika Srpska, the Bosnian entity?

First a bit of history. Republika Srpska was the creation of Dayton, the agreement that ended the Bosnian war in 1995. Its borders were computer generated. Bosnia's borders did change during the period of Ottoman rule but the area now designated as Republika Srpska was always included in those borders. Bosnia has pretty much held its current borders since 1878. The only real exception was the period of Royal dictatorship imposed in 1929.

By contrast, far from Kosovo always being Serbian, Kosovo fell under Serbian occupation only in 1912. Note – occupation. Legal sovereignty over Kosovo was granted not to Serbia but to the new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians after the First World War. Kosovo was established in its current borders since 1945 and in 1974 became a Republic in all but name.

But the real reason the two completely different is genocide. The genocide carried out on behalf of the state of Serbia in 1999 means that it is unthinkable that Kosovo will be returned, against its will, to Serbia. Given that the overwhelming majority of the Kosovan people are not willing accept a restoration of Serbian rule, independence is the only viable option.

In Bosnia it was the Muslims who were victims of an organized campaign of genocide. It was perpetuated by the same Serb nationalists who demanded Republika Srpska. Allowing the existence of Republika Srpska was an an act of appeasement. It is unthinkable that that campaign of genocide should be rewarded by allowing the Serb entity to become independent.
kosovo
Bosnia
genocide

Violence, anti-Islam and Osama

Perhaps inevitably the number of sites that that are dedicated to proving that Islam is a religion of violence. Were these sites supporting Osama bin Laden I could understand it. Osama needs to convince Muslims that his way of violence is a way of religion and he himself is not just a poor little rich kid with a chip on his shoulder trying to work out his personal problems on a wider stage.

That many Muslims reject Osama I'd have thought can only be a good thing. These anti Muslim sites, however, are determined to prove that those Muslims who reject Osama are wrong. The technique is to quote loads of bits from the Koran that advocate violence – in effect doing Osama’s work for him. The Koran (like the Bible) is riddled with contradictions. A peaceful person will focus on the peaceful bits and those who wish to advocate violence will seek the violent bits. Christians do the same with the Bible.

So why are these supposedly anti-terrorist folk trying so hard to prove that the peaceful Muslims are wrong and the ilk of Osama are right?

On the Austrian moving of the Goal Posts re Turkey.

This is from American Future:

It turns out that the Austrians don’t come off well in regard to the 1915 Armenian massacres, either. The German Reich and the Austro-Hungarian Empire were allied with the Ottoman Empire and fully aware of Turkey’s actions against the Armenian minority. But they didn’t try to stop it.

And from Ireland
In my own humble opinion Europe needs Turkey

And frome One Ring to rule them all...
We must not turn our back on our best Muslim ally

Politics
Turkey
Turkey-EU
European Union