Sir Kim Darroch has effectively been forced to resign as UK ambassador to the USA for telling the truth in what he thought would be internally read memos to the Foreign Office about the state of the Trump administration.
We do not know who leaked those memos. Nor do we know why. What we can see is the fallout. That is ugly.
Trump's reaction confirmed all that Darroch said: this is an administration headed by an unstable man, apt to ignore convention and unpredictable as to his actions, who appears unable to predict the consequences of his behaviour because his attention span lasts little longer than the time it takes to send a tweet.
Darroch told the truth. The bullies swung into action.
I say bullies deliberately. I included Boris Johnson, who very obviously knows Darroch: he was US ambassador throughout the time Johnson was at the Foreign Office. Johnson willingly sacrificed him to Trump.
There was not a shred of principle in Johnson's actions.
There was not a moment when Johnson displayed an iota of understanding of the consequences of his own actions.
I very much doubt Johnson thought of anything bar appeasing Trump.
And the result? Those are numerous, but let me list three.
First, British diplomacy will no longer speak truth to power. Darroch joins Ivan Rogers, the former UK ambassador to the EU, amongst those who have paid the price for doing their job appropriately in telling politicians what they may not want to hear, but which had to be said. The result will be ministers being told what they want to hear. The result will be even worse decision making by ministers than we have now.
Second, the influence of the expert is diminished yet again. It's as if all we had ever learned - that quite literally learning about something so that there was expertise on an issue (any issue) has been forgotten. Instead sentiment rules. As a society this takes us into territory that we simply do not know.
Third, we are seeing the rise of political thuggery. Let me be clear that I have known that the world of politics is not a pretty place throughout my adult life. It is one reason why I chose not to seek political office. But the fighting, outright nastiness and blatant ruthlessness of Westminster is not the same as the politics of thuggery which now appears to have developed in the USA, and which is now appearing in the UK and which Johnson is very clearly seeking to both deliver and exploit. Disrespecting a person is one thing: being callously indifferent to them is another.
Of course it can be argued that the bedroom tax, austerity and its like has long exposed the Tories as indifferent to others. And I would agree. It could, perhaps, be argued that the fact that Kim Darroch can be identified as a victims of thuggery should not, perhaps, make him a special case. Millions have suffered before him. But I would respond by saying he is not the issue and it would be a mistake to say he is: in a real sense I am indifferent to Sir Kim Darroch, who I would have struggled to name until a few days ago.
The issue is that every convention of good governance that has underpinned the way in which the sound government of our country has been managed (and by and large, it has been, because of the efforts of public servants and despite the best efforts of ministers on occasion) is being threatened. What is happening is that the boundaries that have underpinned our wellbeing are being knocked down, one by one.
The result is unpredictable. As unpredictable as Trump. As unpredictable as Johnson. But what we do know is that their worldview is brutal and callously indifferent as to consequences. That is not a world I want to live in.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
@ Richard
What are you thoughts on this:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/the-darroch-affair/
You take Craig Murray seriously?
Why not? His name belongs to that small group of ambassadors you mentioned.
There is more to Craig Murray now – and you know it
Genuinely perplexed by the widespread dismissal of Craig Murray as a ‘crank’. I’ve found him to have sensible and decent-minded views (if not always very popular), based upon a working knowledge of top level diplomacy. At least worth engaging with what he says and identifying where any disagreements arise, rather than dismissing his arguments out of hand simply because they’re made by Craig Murray.
Ok
I will look
But Craig rarely hits targets for me
After the leak, Darroch had to go in my view even though the communique was not for general consumption. Darroch did the right thing by resigning. How an on earth could he stay on after that?
I have to say though that Darroch’s writing was below what I would expect from someone of his position. I could have done a much more measured appraisal of Trump’s bad points without resorting to the language Darroch used. In many ways he left himself open and vulnerable with the language he used given his supposed background and education which I surmise may have been more privileged than many?
For the British Government to defend that was just stupid in my view. I’d ask readers to consider that Darroch’s communique was indefensible written as it was and considering the fact there are those who support and deplore Trump in play in the British establishment. Darroch should have been aware of that given his position, his background, his responsibilities and his pay grade. Darroch can be seen as a long line of Brits looking down their noses at other country’s people with their superiority complex and arrogance that is drilled into them in their private educations. This arrogance has delivered him into the hands of the pro-Brigade. He should have foreseen this.
I agree with those on Twatter who say we must now focus on the person who did the leak. I’d expect to see someone with links to Johnson and the pro-US, anti EU Tories responsible.
I also think that double standards abound – Wiki leaks told us about what the U.S. felt about other countries so this sort of internal opinion sharing is rife in international politics – goodness knows how we get on with others at all considering the language used. Disrespect rules human relationships in the UK and U.S. at the moment – it does not augur well for post BREXIT or the future of planet with all its issues.
I am speaking as a working class lad who went to University as a mature student and now is lower middle class and in middle management in the public sector, clinging onto everything he has worked for.
Not even I would have done what Darroch had done in the way he did it. If I am supposed to look up to supposedly successful people like Darroch then I do not know how I can. I could have done a better job of summing up Trump than this man who was educated at Abingdon and went to Durham University but writes about a powerful man in such a loose way that does not reflect his education or standing and comes across as a personal attack.
What does it tell us about our supposedly high calibre education and governance systems when someone in a position of responsibility writes like that about such a sensitive issue?
It tells me that too many of the ‘elite’ in this country operate under a very thin veneer of respectability and capability that is really only granted via privilege, wealth, and the right connections.
Therefore for Darroch, read Johnson, Hunt, Hancock and all the other usual suspects who have been mis-ruling us for far too long by virtue of their connections. I’m heartily sick of all them to be honest.
@PSR You’re supporting Craig Murray, who thinks he’s a bully.
Be that as it may, I think his conclusions are spot on. Perhaps it takes one to know one? And as they were supposed to be encripted and private perhaps one can excuse their ‘forthrightness’?
“It tells me that too many of the ‘elite’ in this country operate under a very thin veneer of respectability and capability that is really only granted via privilege, wealth, and the right connections.”
I suggest the elite are no more respectable than the rest of us. Probably less so. Think of David Greaber who prefers the ‘caring class’ to the ‘working class’…
Peter – I’ve never heard of Craig Murray – so – like Richard – I will look him up.
Right – done it. So.……….Murray says that Darroch was a bully. I’m not saying Darroch is a bully at all. I don’t know the man or anyone who has worked with him to comment.
What I can see is that he is stupid and arrogant with it. A stupidity that only privilege and a sense of entitlement could produce. Darroch obviously takes himself far too seriously if he thinks he can write like that about his host and that that is acceptable.
I’m basically a civil servant in local Government and we are warned time and time again when putting things in writing to write carefully and professionally especially about contentious issues. Darroch seems to think this does not apply to him. He is the master of his own downfall in my view. Maybe he knew he was leaving and threw caution to the wind? Or maybe he likes the sound of his own opinions so basely expressed.
And then for some in the British Government to defend it?!!! Do you think that the way we talk about our supposed allies should be like that? Really?!! The good old British superiority complex is alive and well even though we are now very small and insignificant country indeed and about to become even more so.
We need friends – especially if we leave Europe (God forbid). Is this the best way to portray ourselves on the world stage? Is it? Really?
You do not conduct international relations along the lines of tittle tattle over the back yard fence. Or do you? I happen not to think so.
PSR
I have to disagree on this one
Diplomats are paid to be diplomatic in public and candid in private, hence the e3xtreme protection given traditionally given to their correspondence. Candour is the requirement and he provided it. I think he did his job, as required, and as I would have wanted it as Foreign Secretary
He was good at the public role but this correspondence was meant to be very private and was appropriate in that context, in my opinion
Richard
Darroch did not have a priviledged background, surprisingly, but that’s not the issue.
His cables should have stayed with whom they were addressed to, he was right to tell it as it is about Trump, you want diplomacy to be smooth on the surface, but blunt in depth. No time wasted reading between lines, risking misinterpretation.
Whoever leaked them has an agenda, or was paid by someone who has. That’s what should be the focus, who did this and why.
Beyond that, there is the lasting damage done to diplomatic practise that Richard mentions, that is very serious too, but there will surely be new ways for information to be shared more securely after this leak.
The assessments were common knowledge of course, but the diplomatic damage is significant, at least while Trump is in power.
As for Johnson’s reaction, that too is totally in keeping with his character. Nothing less was expected, surely.
My thoughts exactly.
Completely agree Marie. Darroch was just doing his job, and any error or fault lies with the person who leaked this. Who were they and what were their motives? That’s the point here.
The FSB, to cause the maximum possible degree of trouble in the West? Wouldn’t surpise me at all.
Or someone with hard right sympathies hoping to get rid of Darroch and see him replaced by a political appointee who’ll brown nose Trump? After all, that fascist Farage is calling for civil servants and members of the Armed Forces to be sacked if they are ‘anti Brexit’.
Marie
Bizarrely everything you have said proves my point. And BTW he was educated at Abingdon School. Go and read about it. That was his gateway to privilege and his subsequent arrogance perhaps?
I agree that something dastardly has gone on in revealing what he said and the culprit deserves to be caught. I’m no Johnson or Trump fan – maybe I am at fault for being a class warrior – fair enough.
But make no mistake: Darroch should have known better. He misjudged the Toxic Tory party landscape and if he wanted to talk like that he’d have been better hopping on a plane and doing so face to face in London. He was reckless in my view.
The political landscape has changed since 2016 – have you not noticed? Its a landscape pocked with trap doors and twisted loyalties to undemocratic forces whom have yet to reveal themselves fully.
Things have changed and hubristic attitudes like Darroch’s are finished. Now is the time to be careful and clever and subtle otherwise the people we are dealing with will have field day destroying people who have our best interests at heart. You get up close to your enemies – yes? You get up close by not insulting them or giving them ammunition. These are the new rules of engagement with populist leaders. And like their followers it best taking time to understand them and take them seriously before you take them on.
By all means lets criticise Johnson (after all he’s like a self opening piñata of vanity and mendacity) but not for failing to back a flawed character like Darroch who should have known better and shot himself and the FO and his country in the foot as soon as he pressed ‘send’.
Richard – I’m afraid we will have to disagree on this one. I will say no more.
“Sir Alan Duncan, a Foreign Office minister, attacked Johnson’s role in the affair.
“For someone who wants to lead, let alone unite, the country, that was contemptible negligence on his part,” Duncan told the BBC. “He has basically thrown this fantastic diplomat under the bus to serve his own personal interests.”
The Conservative MP Sir Patrick McLoughlin agreed, saying: “It is unedifying to see someone who wants to be prime minister failing to stand up for hard-working civil servants, who have done nothing wrong, under attack from foreign governments. Leadership involves standing up for your team.”
And these are fellow Tories opinions of Johnson! Let’s hope they and others in their party do the decent thing if he becomes PM, and vote with the opposition in a motion of no confidence so that we at least get a chance to elect a different PM.
And this treatment of Darroch is typical of the pattern we see in British politics now, where exprienced and knowlegeable civil servants are attacked by know-nothing political fanatics like the Brexiters who cannot accept facts, logic or reason. Witness Olly Robbins being held accountable for ‘not standing up to Brussels’, when in reality he has negociated the best possible WA in very unfavourable circumstances. And he is leaving the CS shortly. Can you blame him?
The balancing viewpoint
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
I read it
It changes none of my arguments
Richard, the two U.K. blogs I read most are you and Craig Murray. For similar reasons. You are both experienced and practical men in your fields who are happy to say what they believe to be the case based on the facts and do not fear getting a kicking from commenters and you are both happy to hold your ground and amend it if the facts change. You are both of but outside the establishment. Give a kindred spirit a chance!
As for this US ambassador malarkey, who knows what is going on. Craig points out Darroch was a Blair political appointee who was up to his neck in supporting bombing middle easterners. That for me is enough principled reason to be happy to see the back of him though he was retiring in six months anyway. It will make no difference the new guy will probably be the same as the old guy though he will probably make a better job of appearing to enjoy “getting as far up Trumps a*** as possible and staying there” to paraphrase Blair.
I have to confess the portrayal does not ring well with me
Richard, peculiarly enough it IS a world I want to live in. I am 77 next month and I know Boris will obliterate the Tory party, and I want to see it. I also know that public consciousness is growing and I want to inform it. So, I agree with Christopher Fry: “Thank God our time is now when wrong comes up to meet us everywhere never to leave us till we take, the greatest stride of the soul man ever took. affairs are now soul size the enterprise is exploration unto God. Where are you making for? It takes so many thousand years to wake. But will you wake for pity’s sake?”
I hope your last sentence in your headline piece was not a suicide note!
@PSR
When I mentioned Darroch’s background I meant his social roots, not his educational path which obviously was priviledged, otherwise he wouldn’t have made it in the higher civil service.
Darroch is irrelevant really, I don’t know if he was careless, arrogant, or both, but I gather his communication methods with the UK government were quite standard practice and I’m not convinced he was any more naive than any other civil servant handling sensitive information.
I agree these methods have to change, and quick. But the Darroch himself is not really the issue needing attention.
PSR,
I’m with Marie on this one. While Darroch may have been unwise and/or naive in transmitting his comments electronically (a practice which probably needs to change in this day & age), I think you have gone overboard in trying to blame what happened on his ‘priviliged education’.
While I fully share your distaste for the English (so-called & mis-named) ‘public’ education system, I see it as unfair to automatically assume all who pass by it emerge with a superiority complex and are necessarily arrogant. I know nothing of Darroch’s personality & character, but – if the Guardian is to be believed – he certainly did not come from a privileged background, but grew up on a council estate and went to Abingdon on a bursary.
For the record, I came from a family of school teachers and went to a state grammar school (in the days before comprehensives).
Marie
All I will say is this: if you are going to be candid in this political landscape with so many snakes in the grass – do it face to face, personally and verbally – not in writing. Darroch is at fault because he broke a cardinal rule regarding written material used over electronic means of transfer. He left tracks. The result was that it was used as evidence against him that went beyond hearsay. I think diplomats everywhere will have something to learn from this.
You are right however (and I have always endorsed this) in pointing out that it is those who see this as evidence and are prepared it to use to their advantage that we should be worried about.
But surely the lesson is that now we know how ‘they’ work, more caution must be exercised? I would advise it!
Sorry to return to the point – but the rules have changed – they really have.
You may be right
Indeed they have. “Lessons will be learnt”…as the saying goes.
Unwise, careless, he probably was.
He should have had a crash course in online secure communication technology…whatever, they all need to beware of loitering ears up there, those in powerful and responsible positions.
No written trace, no audio trace, no trace at all.
Face to face not even safe…unless you screen for recording machines…it’s a new space out there.