Truth, Fiction and the Manama Dialogue...
The Telegraph reported on
Monday (HERE
that the Secretary of State for Defence Phillip Hammond had dismayed UK allies
in the Middle East by pulling out of a high profile engagement to speak at the
Manama dialogue, allegedly to focus on the possible changes to the DE&S
privatisation. This has been seen as putting in peril UK efforts to secure
deals on Eurofighter Typhoon and the expansion of naval basing in Bahrain. Having
read the article, Humphrey came to the conclusion that it is a unique ability
of the British media to turn any good news story into a disaster from any
possible angle.
Its worth noting that the Manama
dialogue is not a government organised event but instead one run by the
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). It remains a singularly
high profile event, and one that is very much the jewel in the Bahraini crown when
it comes to regional events – in an area dominated by ever glitzier air shows,
defence exhibitions and ostentatious displays of capability, the ability to
host a high profile think-tank event is still extremely important and one
unmatched by other nations in the region.
As an event, the UK Government
has always provided a high profile level of attendance, as seen this year by
the presence of William Hague (Foreign Secretary) and a large delegation of
senior military officers including the Chief of the Defence Staff. The Telegraph
story would have you believe that the UK was snubbing the entire event, when in
fact there was a very high level of representation from across Government.
The story also fails to highlight
the signal shift in the UK commitment to the Gulf region since 2010. It is fair
to say that the current Government places an extremely high priority on
engagement in the Middle East (UK ministerial visits into the region since May
2010 now number in the hundreds). In a region where constant engagement and
dialogue make all the difference in supporting relationships (and opening the
doors to possible wider opportunities), this step change in meetings has made
an enormous difference.
Its not as if Philip Hammond hasn't
spent considerable time in the region this year already - indeed he was present only two weeks previously
at the Dubai Air Show and like other Ministers has been out several times this
year. Indeed it is genuinely getting to the stage where some senior Ministers reportedly encounter each other more in the transit lounge of Dubai Airport than they do
around the Cabinet Table!
This should be coupled to the
wider reality that the UK defence engagement in the region is currently at a
level unsurpassed in peacetime since the ostensible withdrawal in 1971. One
only has to look at the MOD newsfeed and service journals to see that the UK
has quietly established a very substantial, indeed near permanent, presence in
the region across all the nations out there. This ranges from the traditional
training teams through to naval facilities in Bahrain and the increased use of
Minhad Airbase for the deployment on exercises of Typhoon and Tornado jets on the SHAHEEN STAR series of exercises. This
year alone there have been nearly 100 port visits to the UAE by the Royal Navy,
and the deployment of the Red Arrows to the Middle East has made front page
news across the region, buying a level of diplomatic influence that other
nations can only dream of.
Of course it is disappointing when
senior Ministers have to cancel their travel plans, but that is the reality of
being a Minister – you are not master of your own destiny. In a department where
the slow but steady upward delegation of decision making means Ministers need
to be involved more and more often, there are arguably barely enough Ministers
now to cope with the sheer number of decisions required of them – all of which
require considerable thought. This is perhaps another argument in favour of ‘starred
officers’ as the presence of senior officers at 3&4* level can help act as
a replacement form of access into the UK system, and in a region where visible
gestures count for a lot, helps demonstrate that the UK takes the nations in it
seriously.
So to suggest that the UK
position in the Middle East is weakened due to this decision is absolute
rubbish. One only has to look at the wider picture to see that since 2010 there
has been a very substantial shift in emphasis to the region which is paying
dividends in all manner of areas. The top level visits are one part of a wider
strategy which is seeing the UK return to a region in which it has long been
missed. The UK presence in the region now is probably stronger and more influential than at any point in a generation. At a time when we do ourselves down far too often as a nation, it is a shame to push a nakedly biased agenda like this and ignore the incredibly positive and advantageous position in which the UK finds itself.
One could argue that mischief
making articles like this, suggesting insults and coming up with suggestions of a snub by
Hammond smacks more of an agenda by a paper which seems to have been drafted
onto the ORBAT of a tiny group of disaffected individuals who seemingly place more
importance on capbadge loyalty over their obligations to the
Official Secrets Act and implementing the policies of a democratically elected
government on issues with which they disagree.
Is this such a high profile meeting compared to NATO, FPDA, Shangri-la dialogue meetings?
ReplyDeleteYour current sources of information obviously now include Sir Humph, so you are not a, 'normal member of the public'!
ReplyDeleteWhilst I see a certain slant on this blog and one with which I would have some reservations, I do not include questions of a military type.
The views of the Press and, in particular those of the Telegraph, are puzzling in as much as they seem to contain factual errors, misleading interpretations and willful manipulation, (spin). Sir Humph must tread carefully here, but i smell a rat in a hat. It might be of the bowler variety or it might be a brass one. The average journo is too beholden to his sources to present an independent article,