Common ground
Sir: Katy Balls asks ‘Lawyer or leader?’ (Politics, 25 January), but it became fairly clear which Keir Starmer is when he appointed as his Attorney General Lord Hermer, a human rights lawyer. As was mentioned, Lord Hermer has often represented those rejecting British values rather than standing up for them.
Sir Keir and Lord Hermer show a clear preference for international law over Britain’s common law. They ignore the reality that common law has served the nation brilliantly over the centuries. It relies on the precise written word and precedent, being non-political, transparent, predictable and fair. British laws are enacted by our democratically elected parliament which can amend or repeal them. In contrast, international law is created by cabals of unelected, like-minded lawyers with particular outcomes in mind. It cannot be democratically repealed or amended, is often politically driven and has outcomes that often conflict with natural justice.
As the world becomes more dangerous, the government seems to inhabit a fantasy bubble in which international law sorts it all out. Dream on. Meanwhile, the most dangerous nations in the real world give international law no thought at all.
Gregory Shenkman
London SW7
The army we need
Sir: Harry Halem draws a false lesson from the current war between Russia and Ukraine (‘Losing battle’, 1 February). It is certainly true that countries like Poland and Finland need large citizen/soldier armies, ready to fight in defence of their own territory. That’s the current Ukrainian experience. But Britain is an offshore island on the other side of Europe. We fight our wars at sea and overseas. Unless you think we’re going to fight the Russians in Flanders or Normandy, a part-trained mass army deployed at distance is neither required nor feasible.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in