Performative Opposition?

From Newham Voices, we learn that Mayor Fiaz and deputy cabinet member, John Whitworth will be joining the DESI protests. Again.

In the case of Cllr Whitworth, we’re aware that he is against the use of force by any western countries. Western countries are innately immoral. Of course, this prohibition does not extend to non-western countries. Nor to the sale, (or gift) of weapons by no-western countries.

In the case of Mayor Fiaz, the roots of her ideological opposition are less clear. It would be uncharitable to suggest that her opposition was merely performative aimed at currying favour with the left. It is difficult to assign her motivation to passivism given that she has latterly been supportive of the attempts by the armed forces of Ukraine to evict their unwelcome neighbour from Ukrainian territory.

In order to do this they had to employ, umm, weapons. The sort that kill people. Weapons supplied by Britain and its NATO allies. Just like those displayed at, err…the DESI.

We may be doing them both a disservice. It may be that Fiaz and Whitworth believe that Russian troops will be sent packing with a bunch of flowers and farewell card.

But we cannot help but feel that the Ukrainian refugees to which Cllr Whitworth refers, would like rather more of these “abhorrent” weapons to be sent to Ukraine. Rather like President Zelensky. A few more weapons might bring the period of occupation to an end somewhat sooner.

Sooner or later the inherent contradictions of performative leftism become apparent. They are against war, (who isn’t?), but we shouldn’t fight aggressors. 

They are in favour of welcoming displaced people, but against stopping the cause of their displacement.

We should supply weapons to Ukraine but we shouldn’t manufacture them.

Cllr Whitworth seems to imply that the flight of people from Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine is the result of UK arms exports. The Taliban retook Afghanistan without the help of western weaponry; the repression of the Syrian people was done with largely Russian weapons (and troops), and the conflict in Ukraine was also the result of a Russian invasion. Quite how their “pain” is the result of western arms exports is something of a puzzle and just what “profit” British companies acquired from the use of Russian weapons, remains a mystery.

Interestingly, the TUC recently discussed the Ukraine conflict.

The TUC motion, proposed by the GMB, ASLEF and the NUM supported the “immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from all Ukrainian territories occupied since 2014”, and “the continuation and increasing of moral, material, and military aid from the UK to Ukraine”.

If ASLEF and the NUM are backing more arms shipments, it suggests that Fiaz and Whitworth are seriously out of touch, as well as being just a little comnfused.

Footnote:

The UK currently employs one of the stricter codes (shared with the EU) when it comes to arms exports.

The key considerations are: 

The Criteria considered whether the proposed export would: 

• contravene the UK's international commitments 

• be used for internal repression 

• provoke or prolong armed conflicts or aggravate existing tensions in the destination country 

• be used aggressively against another country 

• adversely affect the national security of the UK or allies 

• be diverted or re-exported under undesirable conditions 

• seriously undermine the economy 

• seriously hamper the sustainable development of the recipient country

Previous
Previous

Justice for Dennis?

Next
Next

Industrial Unrest at Folkstone Road