The Tribune

FOLLOWING last week’s column about the Conservative Party’s leadership contest in Britain, I should like to offer further comment today on the situation facing the winner that includes an immediate predecessor who remains very much on the scene. This ought to be timely because the result of the protracted two-month process will be announced next Monday. As I have mentioned before, since Britain’s voice is influential around the world, information about a new Prime Minister and government creates considerable interest both domestically and overseas.

The UK press is already talking about when -- rather than if -- frontrunner Liz Truss takes up residence at No 10 Downing Street, since all the indications are that that is the most likely outcome. It is said she will be presented with some of the most daunting challenges for the nation in recent history. Top of the list are the cost of living crisis with double digit inflation and soaring energy prices, no end to the Ukraine war and growing industrial unrest and strikes at home. There is also an immigration crisis with illegal crossings of the English Channel from France out of control as well as continuing wrangling with Brussels in connection with Britain’s departure from the European Union, including over the Northern Ireland Protocol – and these are to name just a few of the current issues.

Certainly, they constitute formidable problems and their seriousness should not be underestimated. But some of them -- like the energy crisis which is even worse elsewhere in Europe -- are not unique to Britain. So, to my eye, some parts of the UK press are indulging in hyperbole in calling the situation the ‘most horrendous inheritance’ since Winston Churchill took over the premiership from Neville Chamberlain during wartime in 1940 or even suggesting that it is as bad as that facing Margaret Thatcher in 1979. At that time, after a period of political and economic turmoil in the 1970s, Britain was considered by many to be in terminal decline as the sick man of Europe in the grip of trade union power and, as such, virtually ungovernable – and, whether one liked her or not, Britain’s first female Prime Minister will go down in history as having successfully restored the UK’s fortunes in many different ways during the course of the next decade.

Many observers believe that the UK’s supposed demise is being overplayed, with scaremongering by the so-called merchants of doom, who are intent on the country talking itself into a recession and are still trying to prove that Brexit is to blame for all its current woes.

One of the difficulties for a new Tory leader will be the fractious and rebellious mood within a parliamentary party still divided over Britain’s relationship with the EU so that MPs’ support and loyalty for any leader – partly but not exclusively because of differences over Europe -- may be in doubt. Their infighting and lack of discipline were also demonstrated when Prime Minister Boris Johnson was ousted by his Tory MP colleagues despite his ensuring their own success in individual constituencies when he carried all before him in winning the 2019 General Election with a thumping 80-seat majority. But it seems to be the case that unlike, for instance, Conservative predecessors John Major and Theresa May – or, indeed, Margaret Thatcher herself -- who clearly had come to the end of their careers in high office, Johnson still has political ambitions.

Apparently, he harbours thoughts of a second coming, not dissimilar to his hero Churchill who had been thrust into the political wilderness before his dramatic recall to save Britain from Nazi Germany. If that sounds fanciful, according to all reports Johnson continues to command substantial support in the Tory party in the country, with many even having demanded he should be included as a candidate in the leadership contest. So he is now in a unique position to wreak political havoc if he chooses to do so. However, he could opt to return to his lucrative work as a highly successful newspaper columnist when his utterances will be followed eagerly, and also boost his bank balance by commanding huge fees on the after dinner speaking circuit.

Be that as it may, if he manages to survive the pending investigation by the Commons Privileges Committee about his having potentially misled Parliament over ‘partygate’ allegations, and he decides to address the Tory annual conference in the autumn, he is likely to overshadow new leader Liz Truss. But, mindful of a possible political future, he will surely swear loyalty to her as his successor and bide his time for a call to return when – as he presumably hopes -- the Party comes to realize that she will be unable to deliver victory at the next General Election. It is, of course, bordering on the foolish to seek to judge a new Prime Minister who has not even taken office. But, for some people, the comparisons in favour of Johnson are obvious as they fear Liz Truss will soon show herself to be out of her depth in the top job, though others predict she will be a steady hand on the tiller and an effective leader.

As is well known, Boris Johnson thrives on publicity. His visit to Kyiv last week to mark Ukraine’s 31st anniversary of independence from the Soviet Union, when a special plaque dedicated to him was unveiled, came as no surprise. But some ask whether his trip was necessary given his imminent departure as PM. He took the opportunity to speak about another UK major support package, which apparently had already been announced at the recent meeting of defence ministers in Copenhagen, and pledged yet again Britain’s long-term commitment to Ukraine.

Furthermore, he has produced an article, published exclusively in the Daily Mail a few days ago, setting out some of his achievements as PM and saying why he considered that, even though the next few months will be tough for Britain, the country will bounce back since the foundations for long-term gains in prosperity and productivity have already been laid. Is this delusional or is his optimism justified? Who can tell, but some are saying these were hardly the words of a leader who, after having just lost what he called the best job in the world, intends to stay down for long.

REPORTING OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES IN CHINA

Although it is said that the origins of the concept can be traced to ancient Greece, a brief study shows that an understanding of human rights and its expression in modern parlance started only after the United Nations was founded in 1945.

The UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and the post of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was established -- much later in 1993 -- ‘to promote and protect’ such rights ‘for all people’; and this included, in particular, promoting international co-operation on the issue.

Interestingly, two major current international human rights issues came to the fore last week that have hitherto attracted relatively little media attention. So they might be worth examining. These are the Rohingya Muslim refugees hounded out of Myanmar and the alleged mistreatment of the Uyghur Muslim minority in China.

The Rohingya refugee crisis is said to be the largest of its kind in the world today. This Muslim ethnic minority group, originally from Bengal, emigrated generations ago to live in the neighbouring majority Buddhist country of Myanmar. Despite the large numbers involved, they are not recognised there and have historically been denied any legal identity or citizenship, thus becoming the world’s largest stateless population. Being marginalised with limited access to education, jobs and health services, they lapsed into poverty and despair. As early as the 1980s, Rohingya refugees started moving to Bangladesh in the face of violence, and later, in 2017, after continuing armed attacks on them and other serious human rights violations, thousands were forced to flee their homes and seek sanctuary in other countries -- mainly Bangladesh but also smaller numbers in India and Thailand. Reportedly, up to one million displaced Rohingyas are now trapped in rambling refugee camps in Bangladesh. The issue has attracted publicity recently because India, which regards these refugees as illegal immigrants, has revoked a plan to offer them free residential housing in Delhi.

Meanwhile, the UN has been pressing for a strong, coordinated international response to the crisis including measures to hold the ruling military junta in Myanmar accountable for its mistreatment of the Rohingya people. But the military coup there in February, 2021 and the consequent political and economic turmoil has made any resolution of the problem less likely than before. Nonetheless, the UN considers that the only ‘sustainable solution is for the Rohingya people to be returned to a peaceful, inclusive and democratic Myanmar’.

As for the Uyghurs, this important issue is now receiving publicity again because of claims that China is seeking to prevent publication of a special UN report that is expected to criticise the government’s ‘inhumane’ treatment of over a million Muslims -- mainly Uyghurs -- in the northwest region of Xinjiang. It is claimed the evidence shows they are being detained in heavily fortified so-called ‘re-education centres’ and, in some cases, subjected to forced labour. This situation has been under international scrutiny for several years. But China has publicly rejected any likely criticism in the UN report, calling allegations of human rights violations, genocide and forced labour the ‘lie of the century’ while reiterating that the detention camps are for counterterrorism purposes and to deradicalise extremists.

While the long-awaited report may be further delayed, the UN Human Rights Commissioner, Michelle Bachelet, has said she had hoped to publish it before the end of her term of office on August 31. Her role is often called the UN’s toughest and trickiest job and is said to require courage in confronting governments. She insists publicly that she has been doing an ‘independent assessment’ of continuing news ‘that points to wide patterns of enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions’ while looking in depth at allegations of ‘serious human rights violations’.

The report is seen by some as a test of the credibility of the UN in its capacity as a watchdog of human rights internationally, but the Chinese government is reported to regard the issue as an internal matter. Even if the UN voted to establish a formal probe or investigation, it appears that there is no mechanism to compel China to comply with any recommendations which could simply be ignored. But many believe it is important to publicise the issue in the hope of persuading a change of policy and to reinforce the UN’s obligation to investigate abuses of human rights around the world.

TOO MUCH POWER FOR THE SCIENTISTS DURING THE PANDEMIC

I am indebted to a friend for sending me an interesting UK press report recording the views of Rishi Sunak, the former UK Chancellor of the Exchequer and one of the two final contenders in the Tory leadership contest, about the government’s handling of the coronavirus crisis in Britain.

He said that it was now clear that it had been wrong to ‘empower scientists’ to such a degree during the pandemic – and, specifically, to allow the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, known as SAGE, to have so much sway over policy. He considered that there had been insufficient consideration of the downside of locking down the country, in particular the foreseeable damaging effects on the economy and, for example, the consequences of shutting down schools. With the benefit of hindsight, it had become evident that too much weight had been given to the views of the scientists, some of whom had exaggerated the danger and threat of the virus and had created a climate of excessive fear.

Rishi Sunak also revealed that the country was within a hair’s-breadth of another lockdown in December last year -- including over Christmas -- in response to the Omicron variant of COVID-19 that had suddenly appeared in South Africa. In the end, no such restrictions were imposed. But my wife and I were interested to hear about this because we had made plans for a family Christmas and New Year in the UK. We decided to cancel late in the day for fear of another lockdown that would have probably prevented us from getting home again as scheduled – knowing, as we did, that at the height of the pandemic in 2020 some people who had travelled to England were unable to return for many months. But all was not lost because at least Virgin Atlantic allowed us to reuse the tickets!