New wave of foreign policy?
He came to bury Blairite foreign policy, not to praise it. He came to lament the "scars of ten years of government". He came to explain patiently how we all must learn (a word he used no fewer than six times) from the past. This was Tony Blair's former policy chief David Miliband speaking. Politics is a brutal business.
The foreign secretary's speech (read it ) proclaimed a "second wave of New Labour foreign policy" and was spun in advance as a significant break from what had come before.
But hang on a second. Beyond the words and beyond the carefully calibrated signals what has actually changed in British foreign policy?
Mr Milliband worried aloud that Muslims think, "we're seeking not to empower them but to dominate them". The lesson, he said, was, "that it's not good enough to have good intentions". Quite right, you might think. What, though, will that mean for policy? He didn't say beyond, that is, backing the age old British position that Turkey should be welcomed into the EU.
The foreign secretary declared that "there never is a military 'solution'". Did that mean he didn't back any of the four Blair wars? No, he made clear he had backed them and still did. So, what did it mean? Well, he went on, we need to work with all the neighbours of Iraq. So too said Tony Blair.
He did talk of stronger international institutions - or what Gordon Brown has talked of as a "new world order" - without spelling out what they were.
Now, it may be that David Miliband could not say what he really thinks. It could be that his message was that with him and Gordon running foreign policy there'll be no more wars, no more messianic rhetoric about spreading democracy, no more bypassing of the UN. Or it could be that that's the impression he wants to create with voters who left Labour in protest at the Iraq war.
The lesson of the first wave of New Labour foreign policy is that it was shaped by events and was best assessed by what ministers actually did and not the speeches they gave. The same, I suspect, is true of the second wave.
UPDATE, 03:30 PM: Before he became prime minister, Gordon Brown talked of building "a new diplomacy in the next few years to build better institutions".
He went on to say that, "the American alliance we have, the European cooperation we welcome and are going to strengthen in the years to come, and our role in the Commonwealth are the basis on which we move forward - but I believe that there is a collective interest that the world can be persuaded of, in the United Nations playing a bigger role in security, Nato playing a bigger role out of theatre, and also the European Union as a collective institution playing a fuller role in world politics."
He was speaking in an interview I did with him . You can hear it by clicking here.
I'm 
Comments
I watched the speech.
Complete, utter spin. The Labour Party is excelling subtle spin.
"Our generation"? What was that all about? Did David and his mates save the day?
This speech just added to the speculation that an election is coming soon. Even the unions won't criticise the Government.
David Milliband needs some lessons in public speaking, his style is too similar to Iain Duncan Smith, and looked what happened there.
What a load of codswallop! Plenty of spin, and no substance of any degree...reminds me of some criticisms of the Conservative Party by the Labour party recently, but the statement applies here.
What David Milliband is trying to say is that we'll do exactly the same thing, but with new words.
Well, it worked for them in 1997, 2001 and 2005, so why not 2007/8? Problem: The British people have cottoned on now and are sick of it.
I've just looked on this jokers 'They Work For You' entry. He voted FOR the Iraq War! What a hypocrite!
Nothing said about an ethical foreign policy then,so where did that go?
Yet again ,the ruling elite seem to think they can pull the wool over the population,they are living in a dream world.
Quite right Nick. Ask Milliband how his words will translate into actions.
The reality is, New Labour is and was in favour of bringing about regime change in Iraq, (illegal under international law) under the cover of the false 'WMD 45 minute threat' claims.
No amount of speech-making changes the reality: Labour is tranished with the debacle that is Iraq.
Just being cynical doesn't make you clever. Wait and see what Gordon has in mind - we're already seeing forces reduced and pulled back in Iraq since Brown came in.
Spot on Nick, spot on analysis indeed. I am a great fan of Milliband as an orator - he speaks well publicly and can convince audiences of his point of view. The problem comes when asking whether they walk the walk. What ever happened to the Personal Carbon Allowances that were endlessly trailed by David? Similar problems present elsewhere - they say the right things but, I recon, rarely follow through.
Lots of enthusiasm from Miliband but he isn't quite there. I was thinking, yesterday, that he would've been a disaster as Prime Minister. As former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's good intentions crashed on the rocks, it's better Gordon Brown took the helm in the same way Yasuo Fukuda has taken on the role. The boy Miliband lacks experience. I'm not sure I agree with his judgement on goals or the balance of powers. He seems a little dazzled by idealism and somewhat ignorant of the world outside these shores. This is not to run the man down. You have to start somewhere. I just see him more as an apprentice than a master in this.
There's a bigger historical drift which suggests things will improve of their own accord. This rising curve of opportunity is something, I suggest, Miliband learns to ride rather than direct. Arrogance and possessiveness only makes people look silly and tends to be counterproductive. It's better Miliband does nothing than something. For instance, his comments on Burma are a bit of a clanger. Having an interest in martial arts and Zen Buddhism, I see sanctions and exhortations as not being very useful. It sounds good and attracts a crowd but is a failure as a policy position. Less crowd pleasing flash and more respect and trade would deliver a better long-term result.
Things are developing but unless Miliband gets a clue he's going to fall off. By more actively helping other powers develop better leadership and investing in developing the people, as with Britain, one may see the quality of leadership rise and opportunity expand. Annoying people and closing the door just makes things worse. So, I see some positive in Miliband's speech but it's only half the deal. I'm hoping some reality penetrates and helps him shift to a better focus and deliver more crisp thinking down the line. As things stand I can see where he's coming from, some scope for improvement but, as he suggests himself, I'll judge him on the delivery not the rhetoric.
Was he a member of the Labour Party when Blair was in power - did he resign or object - thought not - after all one has principles!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh dear. New face, same tired old foreign policy (back the Yanks at all times) dressed up in a few new words. Like the rest of Brown's new government policies, NOTHING has changed.
Neil
Forget the debate over details and actions, look at the big picture here. The big goal was draw a line under Blair's unpopular foreign policy and signal something new. This is the simple message to the voters. Well, mission accomplished. Nick Robinson takes only until his second paragraph to tell us that this is "a second wave of New Labour foreign policy." This is all the public will remember.
That's the cynical bit. Personally, I'm willing to give them a chance. Gordon Brown is clearly a different kind of prime minister to Tony Blair, and I'm surprised, stunned and, yes, impressed with how he's taken control of the government and the country. As at the Treasury, there is a feeling of someone who is incredibly well organised and quite unflappable.
Myshkin:
I stand on the shore, point at the sea, and tell it to recede.
It does so.
Did it do it because I told it to? Or did the tide recede because it was inevitable?
Nick,
I like your style up to a point. However, you are perhaps too careful in your use of language, without quite getting to the point. Can you please say what you think, even if it means having to be explicitly critical of the government or one of its ministers? For instance, do you believe that despite all the talk of change, the government will not in fact shift its position on any foreign policy area?
In a previous item you mentioned that Gordon was hoping that the reaction from the Conservative Party would meet his intentions, yet you never identified what the reaction was that he was looking for. Perhaps you could fill us mere mortals in on the details.
For Myshkin and all the others who think we should give the new leadership a chance, just three letters, BAE.
How clever Blair & Brown have been. To remain in power they have manipulated and continue to dupe the nation. I'll go in,says Tone, do all the radical stuff under the New Labour mantra. That Should keep us in 10 years Id say. I then pull out & you build on the good and with the unpalatable stuff you come in and undo it all. Looking like an opposition leader covered in Teflon. In 15 years
there will be no Torys. Job done comrade.
yawn, different politician, same old drivel. Come on Nick, that speech could have been delivered by any politician from any party. We need some politicians who actually have the interests of this country at heart rather than their own boring, posturing, party political shenanigans!
Do Labour think that we voters are stupid? They have been in power 10 years and now Milliband is the latest cabinet minister to try and pretend he had nothing to do with the Blair years.
Milliband should have told us what is planned for our future involvement in Iraq. This is essential in view of the UK loss of life and expense( ÂŁ1,000 million per year) there. A possible hand-over to UN Forces is essential at this point. The Iraqi's must no longer see us as invaders of their land and hate us to a man. No wonder the insurgents are winning.
He also must admit that the decision to go into Iraq was wrong. Therefore introduce procedures to ensure no future PM is able to behave like Blair and get us into a similar mess again, without National support.
If you take that position you have to be Robin Cook. He's not Robin Cook.
IT IS TIME THE PEOPLE RIGHTS ARE RECOGNISED. THE PEOPLE OF KOSOVO SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE HOW THEY WANT TO BUILT THEIR FUTURE.
NO COUNTRY SHOULT INTEND TO DENY THAT INCLUDING RUSSIA.
The statement made that with regards to the EU treaty, that it should be discussed in Parliament then accepted is akin to saying that a suspected criminal should be given a fair trial and then hanged. The EU Treaty is simply another back door attempt to have the EU Constitution ratified, thereby handing over the sovereignty of our nation on a platter to those who have over the past 1000yrs attemted to take it by force. It is an abomination and a traitorous act by people who were elected to protect the rights of the British people but who in reality are simply feathering their own nests and those of their multinational business supporters.
What a greasy little toad.
plus ca change le meme chose (if my poor French is right)
Milliband is a sad reflection of the political landscape....a career politician and speaker with scant life experience, let alone those of a head of foreign policy. As a member of the political class, who only crave power, I think the UK will be poorly served by him. What base of experience can he draw upon in difficult conversations with other nations?Rhetoric is easy, true conviction is not, and hence why he is wrong for the role and why Gordon Brown os wrong for PM. They have both coveted the power for too many years rather than actually worrying about the gravity of their positions
Hi Nick. Permit me to get to the point, as some of the contributors wish. Can I first quote Howard before the last election. Quote, "Yes we would have gone into Iraq, got rid of Saddam, well before, even if we had to do this on our own" unquote. So much for some Tories here being CONVENIENTLY FORGETFUL.
While we try to trim and recharge our foreign policy to meet the demands of the future, so that more countries around the world are INCLUDED, for more CONCENSUS, we have Hague wanting a TV debate to get us out of the E.U.
Will these old traditionalists that kept our country backwards in our way of thinking NEVER LEARN?
If Hague and some of the contributors that have hatred in their heart, then why does Labour keep doing well in the opinion polls, even after 10 years of low unemployment, low interest rates, low inflation, continuous growth in the economy, record number of nurses and doctors, record number of new hospitals, and the 2nd largest economy in the world?
Oh, maybe that is why the Tories are now showing their true colour.
Yes Nick, they are GREEN WITH ENVY! Have a nice day Nick.
Mr.Milliband was wrong in stating that Al Qida Justifies itself with the 'Suffering of the Palestinians'
Yassir Arafat made it quite clear that there was no connection whatsoever between that organisation and the Palestinians.
Lies, damn lies and Iraq. Nothing has changed from a Government that is spinning its usual hypocritical way into rewriting history.
Lets not forget that this man voted for the war - a war based on a pack of lies and fed to a gullible public.
ALl too often I keep hearing the view that the war was right but the peace has been lost.
Wrong! The war should never have been fought in the first place. Every week the reason behind the war was changed to suit the changing circumstance - something that the public all too soon soon seem to forget.
If Milliband and co want to have any credibility with me, they will announce a complete and total withdrawal of all Uk forces as soon as practically possible.
Not phased withdrawal, no delaying the process to avoid looking "soft" (whatever that mean) or to satisfy the neocons in the US.
They must also say the magic words " We were wrong to invade Iraq". Let's hear it, David. Without them, you will never get my vote again.
David Miliband seems to have very selective memory, a sure sign that the medication is not working as it should. “Lessons to be learned” is a cliché that marks the speaker as being particularly unrepentant about their involvement in policy initiatives in the past. Casting back 15 years to criticise others and mention their support of failed policies also sounds very shallow. I do not know who writes his speeches but he has no excuse for actually pronouncing this one. Perhaps it’s the medication again.
Gosh!! How can one man say sooo much and mean sooo little!! Facts are stubborn things- the war in Iraq that has made the world a much more troubled and insecure place, was both immoral and illegal according to International Law. This is the man who was 'right behind you Tony' and now that Tony has gone he his sticking in the knife, and having the cheek to lecture us about ethics and humility!! Please spare me!!
So when it comes to 'trusting New Labour' I am sorry they have burned my hands, and heart. Let's hope that change comes...
Nick
Most of us view Geroge Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm as cautionary tales. This lot seem to regard them as a template.
What we need is a Ministry of Truth to coordinate the lies of omission, lies of commission and spin.
What is so utterly depressing about this whole charade is that it treats us as though we had neither intelligence or memory. British troups in Iraq have been sent to their deaths in a war justified by a lie and intended solely to secure oil supplies to the United States. If Milliband is prepared to treat the electorate with such contempt, the electorate should reciprocate. The trouble is, it cannot, for democratic politics in this country is effectively dead.
I would like Parliament to be told a few simple things before British troops are sent to foreign shores:
1. What is the UK interest?
2. What will be the cost in blood (our troops, theirs, civilians and likely future impact on UK civilians) and in cash?
3. How long will UK forces be engaged?
4. What will be the conditions for victory or defeat?
5. When will engagement be reviewed?
6. What are our allies contributing?
And could Brown be made to read 'Arithmetic on the Frontier' by Kipling at the start if every PM's questions?
Its the same old players who were in Tonys gang, who had a hand in all that the Blair years delivered us and now its wash our hands of that and its "all nothing to do with us", folks, its Tonys dark years. This is a new way the second way, well the first way failed and they had a hand in that, whats the odd the second way will flounder in a spinning mess too ?
Are we British so stupid ? The Scots and Welsh certainly are not !
Milliband's speech was childish,badly presented and so contorted as to be incomprehensible,and this fellow is the Foreign Secretary.He's still wet behind the ears.
The spin we are getting under Gordon Brown is now even worse than we had with Blair. It is crude and so blatantly obvious as to be annoying.We now get all spin and no substance.The Labour Party conference has been a political disaster,with all comment viciously supressed.
'Learning Lessons'
Having learnt the lessons, does that mean that they have finally got to where their critics were all along?
Yes, everyone has something to learn - but when it comes to international politics, I don't want it to be at my financial expense; or the physical, emotional and political expence of others.
Having an admission that governments do sometimes have things to learn; it needs to be made a 'stake in the ground' -- they can never again state that anything is categorical.
They must evermore allow and admit that whatever they say or do they are very falable - whether it be through ignorance/inexperience or any other cause.
And at least once, in every future interview, they should be made to conceed this point, to us the public they are supposed to represent.
British Foreign Policy has not, in reality, changed in many years - not really since the end of WW2.
What changes is how ready we are to enact upon British Foreign Policy at any one stage. Blair was particularly keen, as was Thatcher. Others were less so and some oppositions were very definitely head in the sand (thinking Foot here).
Like most countries our Foreign Policy depends on opportunity and resources as much as anything else, and of course what is simply practical. So in the end it is, and has to be, dictated by the senior non-elected members of the Foreign office.
A difference in honesty between the Tory's and Lib Dems at the moment is that the Tories know that if they got into power they couldn't really change very much, where as the Lib Dems like to pretend that they could. (Wow, did I just imply honesty by the Tories?)
So it is no surprise that Milliband has nothing new to say, but that doesn't stop him painting the same picture in different colours.
This 'second wave' rubbish is just an attempt to distance themselves from Tony Blair, but the speech itself told us nothing.
I seem to remember something called an Cook and Blair promoting an "ethical foreign policy" back in'97, is this not the same? Blair's second win, closely followed by 9/11, led to a hubristic belief in the power of interventionalist foreign policy - the question for Miliband and Brown is do they have the guts to stick to their beliefs when they see opportunity to "save the world" as Blair did five/six years ago?
"The lesson is that while there are military victories there never is a military "solution".
There's only military action that creates the space for economic and political life."
How does that make Milliband a hypocrite? I know the Iraq debate brings ot the "Bliar" brigade in force, but can't any of them see beyond their own prejudices? Some of the thoughts on this blog are well-expressed and reflect sincerely held positions, but can someone please moderate out the childish bilious bilge?
#38
'Childish bilious bilge'? Sounds like Milliband's speech to me.
Nick,
Having read Mr. Milliband’s contemptible speech to the Labour Conference, I could scarcely contain my rage. So he apologises for foreign policy mistakes does he, we must learn he says. Tell that to the widows and orphans created at the behest of your government, sonny.
Romanus Renatus, I appreciate pithy, short remarks from people who disagree with me, though I detected no bile in the speech.
Some of the spleen-venting does worry me - there really is an ethical case to be made for military intervention in certain circumstances, but it is drowned by the fury and arrogant dismissals of many very hurt people who are submitting comments here.
It is perfectly morally defensible to have invaded Iraq, as long as the motives were simply to do with freeing that country from tyranny - I don't necessarily agree/can't prove with such invasion, or that the motives were so pure, but let's credit the intelligence of those who took that decision, and not use the playground language of "liar,liar". Where they undoubtedly erred was in thinking they had the support of Iraq's neighbours, and they failed to foresee civil war. Those were political errors, not moral ones. What's stopping intervention in Sudan and Zimbabwe? The support of their neighbours, and a lack of certainty of success, not moral considerations.
And the errors were made in Washington, not Whitehall. The British presence made a catastrophic situation a little less catastrophic. It would have happened anyway, and the USA would have been isolated - just what al Qaeda wanted.
Miliband sounds like Brown. He never answers a question, continues over the interviewer refusing to deal with the issues being put to them, repeating what they want us to beleive regardless of reality. They think they are being clever and slick when they are in fact being rude, irritating, unbeleivable, arrogant and disingenious. All this aside, what is really of concern, they are totally unaware of this and appear to beleive themselves. How scary.
Hey johnt!
Why should we 'credit the intelligence of those that took that decision' to invade Iraq? That decision has turned Iraq in to a serious bloody mess. Hardly something that lends credit to ANY of those who voted it through. Did the government lie to us? I think it was worse than that - It was a con that cynically exploited a corrupted political system and a supine British public!
What a mess!
By the way bilious can also mean something that leaves a nasty taste in your mouth.
I am frankly amazed that 'politicians' such as David Milliband still believe that the British people are so stupid (mind you with Labour 11 points ahead in the polls perhaps he is right!)
He condems Blairs foreign policy as if he were the new virgin on the block, instead of being Blairs chief policy advisor during those 10 years of scarring.Is he now saying that he was not responsible, he was only following orders? He is promising a 'second wave'of NuLab Foreign policy. Does this mean another 10 year wave of scarring for the British Public?
Will the last person off the island turn off the lights!
This is probably the closest that will be said to admitting Iraq was a big mistake.
The lesson was that 'it is not quite good enough to have good intentions.' Perfectly put, and it applies to everything about Labour over the past 10 years and for now. Intentions are nothing, if delivery and action are missing. This is reality of Brown/Blair, New Labour. Nice people, with no loyalty to the man who led them for more years than I care to remember, what can we expect of them?
Scary people.
Miliband is a pathetic specimen.
"There never is a military solution"
He must have been home sick the day they taught World War II in history class and off in a fog somewhere during the cold war.
"...the United Nations playing a bigger role in security." ????
It can't handle Darfur or Burma, how will it handle Iran? Does Miliband plan on talking Ahmadinejad to death? I'm afraid even there he's outclassed.
One consolation, it's nice to know that on my side of the pond, as bad as things are...they could be even worse.
Hi Anonymous
Any reasonable person reading my words, which have caused your bile to rise a little, and then yours response will conclude that you either can't or won't address the issues raised. "Why should I listen to the other view, when so many have died because of it?" is hardly an attitude that will further the cause of peace. The fact is, unpalatable though it is to you, that a large number of people in this country believe that intervention in inhumane, brutal dictatorships is morally right, and should be carried out, militarily if necessary, when the political considerations suggest certain success. You haven't articulated a different view at all, but simply dismissed the people as supine, and accused the governemnt of "something worse than" lying to us. What about the innocent people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of Dresden and all the other places where bloody messes have occurred at the behest of ours and the USA's government? You don't say so, but if you are against war full stop, then fine, so am I in an ideal world, but in the real world there are real tyrants causing real torture to their real people. There is a failure of people, leaders included, to deal peaceably with each other, failure which Saddam, Mugabe et al are guilty of too. Your rather comment doesn't help, you just sound bilious.
Great speech Mr Miliband. Now let us see you make it into reality. You would make a great prime minister if you can translate thse excellent words into action.
Great speech Mr Miliband. Can you put these words into action? World will be indebted to you if you can.
It seems to me that David Milliband and co all had very clear personal choices. they know as well as anyone that the whole thing has been a disaster and were probably aware of that the reasons given for it were false when they voted for war. However amid the dodgy dossiers and other so called "intelligence" there was one piece of intelligence they were all very well aware of namely that they would have to give up hopes of high office if they opposed the war.
this meant they all had a clear personal choice. They could have listened to their consituents and voted against the war in accordance with the wishes of the people they claim to represent, and resign as ministers thus losing the perks of power and damaging their careers, Or they could ignore the people they so sanctimoniously claim to represent, vote for the war and thus keep their careers intact.
Most chose to remain ministers. Thereby demonstrating that given the choice between their own interests and those of their country the people they are supposed to speak for might as well be on another planet
Deep down I think they know this to be true but their response has been to shut down any debate, witness the blocking of inquiries, banning demonstrations within a mile of parliament.
They are now all desperate to distance themselves from something which collectively they could have stopped at the time, but cravenly went along with for the sake of themselves. However Tony Blair has hitched us so much to America that they cannot escape it so easily hence Millibands speach which sounded to me like a communist party apparatchik admitting to errors
Iraq used poison gas on its own people, and in the war they started with Iran.
Iraq had annexed Kuwait and resisted our ultimately successful attempt to remove them.
The had launched scud missiles on Israel, a UK friendly nation.
They were unrepentant.
Saddam would not permit full UN investigation of many "presidential Palaces."
Worth remembering that the late Dr David Kelly was looking forward to returning to seeking out WMD facilities, work for which he had been honoured here,
However inspectors had already found:
"50 deployed Al Samoud 2 missiles
Various equipment, including vehicles, engines and warheads, related to the AS2 missiles
2 large propellant casting chambers
14 155 mm shells filled with mustard gas, the mustard gas totaling approximately 49 litres and still at high purity
Approximately 500 ml of thiodiglycol
Some 122 mm chemical warheads
Some chemical equipment
224.6 kg of expired growth media" (Wikipedia)
Intelligence, including that of Mossad, suggested that he may still have had undestroyed missiles and WMDs which might have threatened UK forces in the med, or elsewhere.
The devilling of some critics of those who honestly supported the attacks on Iraq resembles the propaganda of english nazis before WW2 when our nation faced no greater an enemy than now.
Candidly, I could not give a fig. I've had enough and I am emigrating!
Candidly, I could not give a fig. I've had enough and I am emigrating!