When the Gordon Brown addresses Congress this week, he must argue against the evils of protectionism, writes Malcolm Rifkind.
The Telegraph
March 1, 2009
The more battered a prime minister is at home the more he will relish the welcome and the accolades he will receive when he travels overseas. For ministers are honoured abroad while they are abused in their own country.
Even their lesser Cabinet colleagues have the same weakness. When I was minister of defence it was nice to be met with a guard of honour when arriving in Washington and Moscow. The pleasure of the latter was, I must confess, somewhat reduced when I was informed, as we landed, that I was expected to thank them in Russian.
Gordon Brown, this week, will be met by President Obama at the White House and will address both Houses of Congress. He is entitled to feel pleased at being the first European leader to make it to the Oval Office and one of only five British prime ministers to be so honoured by Congress. But before he gets carried away he should realise that these events will not seem quite so historic in Washington. The last foreign leader to address Congress was Ireland's Bertie Ahern. And President Obama has already welcomed to the White House the Japanese prime minister, Taro Aso, who is even more unpopular in Japan than Mr Brown is in Britain.
And while there will be the ritual endorsement of the "special relationship" between the United States and the United Kingdom, that, too, may not be all it appears. As President Obama welcomed his Japanese guest he described the relationship of their two countries as "extraordinarily important" and explained that that was why Mr Aso "is the first foreign dignitary to visit me here in the Oval Office". There is no shortage of flattery in Washington.
Much more important than the welcomes and the compliments will be the messages that Mr Brown takes with him to the White House and the Capitol. The three issues that Mr Brown must concentrate on are Afghanistan, Iran and, of course, the global economic crisis. His message on Afghanistan can be simple and clear. It can never again be allowed to be a base for al-Qaeda terrorists. We match our words with the valour of our soldiers. But other worthy objectives, like the elimination of corruption and the poppy trade, will take a generation and must be divorced from our immediate strategy, since failure to deliver will simply cause disillusion and the appearance of total failure.
On Iran, Mr Brown should warmly endorse the President's proposed dialogue with Tehran. If George W Bush could normalise relations with Colonel Gaddafi's Libya then a comparable deal can be done with Iran. The Prime Minister should also canvass the excellent proposal, put forward by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, that Iran's neighbours, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt, should be invited to join the UN Security Council's negotiations with Iran to halt its nuclear weapon ambitions. They have more to fear than anyone else and must play their part in finding a solution.
When it comes to the world economic crisis, what Gordon Brown says to Congress will matter more than his discussions in the White House. May I offer two pieces of advice? He needn't remind the senators and congressmen that he has been responsible for helping to save the world. We must assume that they are already aware of that. Nor should he repeat his regular claim that our economic mess was created in the US and that he, having had responsibility for the British economy for the last 12 years, bears no share of the blame. That might come across as rather self-serving.
The real message he has to give Congress is about maintaining free trade and the crucial need to avoid a lurch into protectionism. There has always been a strong element within Congress, especially in the Democratic Party, that has distrusted free trade and open markets, and would like to curb imports from abroad. We know from the 1930s that it is exactly that response that turned a serious recession into a major depression. As a result it took the world years longer than would otherwise have been necessary to recover.
Even in Europe there are those who will not learn the lessons of history. President Sarkozy has called on French carmakers to close their factories in eastern Europe and transfer them back to France, which, to put it mildly, would not do much for European solidarity.
Britain has been the global champion of free trade for over 100 years. Breaking down trade barriers has served the world well and created unprecedented prosperity, jobs and economic growth. British prime ministers are, therefore, better qualified than any other heads of government to proclaim its virtues. For its part, the US Congress is the most powerful audience in the world that one could address on this subject.
That, therefore, is Gordon Brown's task this week. If he can ensure that Congress does not go protectionist he might not have saved the world, but he would have made a very useful contribution.
Sir Malcolm Rifkind was foreign secretary, 1995-97, and is MP for Kensington and Chelsea
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Free trade is vital to the economies of many nations. As seen in the 1930s, protectionism and the Hawley-Smoot Tariff, the largest tariff in history, had disasterous effects on the economy.
As for diplomacy, there is no comparison with diplomacy with Gaddafi's Libya and Iran. Libya was bombed by order of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s because they were working on weapons technology. In the attack, most of Gaddafi's family was killed. He finally came out of hiding once Bush was in office and extended an olive branch. Iran's government has repeatedly vowed to destroy the U.S. and began their weapons program again after Israel destroyed it in the 80s. They cannot be negotiated with.
The Fanatical Party wants to assure the Franklinites that it is of utmost importance that we have allies with the other world powers. Positive relationships with other countries will have an impact on both our standing in the world and in the future, if favors are asked.
On the subject of free trade, and Fanatical party wishes to create a balancing act. On one side, we have the positive relationships with the other countries creating an atmosphere of safe and advantageous trade. On the other, we have the protection of FSA goods and businesses. A fine line will be walked with other countries (particularly Britain and the nations involved in NAFTA).
We wish Mr. Gordon Brown a successful trip to Washington.
Taylor Jeromos, the Fanatical Party Leader and Spokesperson, to the citizens of FSA
While our main concern is the protection of domestic businesses, we may negotiate trade agreements with major buyers of Franklin goods. If a country does not buy a large amount of Franklin's goods, we will put up a higher tariff on that countries incoming goods, but with countries such as the U.S. who buy nearly fifty percent of F.S. goods, we will have no tariffs.
Post a Comment