As political scandals go, it may be less immediately compelling than all this business about the Home Secretary’s love life. But in terms of import and, I suspect, shelf life, the extent of British involvement in the attempted coup against the government of Equatorial Guinea is certainly the one to watch. With every careful, clever parliamentary question set down by the shadow foreign secretary Michael Ancram, the Foreign Office position looks less and less tenable. With every further bit of digging by journalists, more weird and murky stuff emerges.
The chief questions at the moment are these: why did Jack Straw suddenly change his mind and agree that Britain did, after all, know about the attempted coup as early as January this year? He had given point-blank denials to two newspapers investigating the story — and then suddenly decided that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had been given the intelligence. And so it follows that if Britain did know, why didn’t we do what we were meant to do under international law and tell the — admittedly corrupt and loathsome — government of Equatorial Guinea about it? We know that the FCO took the various reports it had received about the planned coup seriously enough to revise its civil contingency plans for the possible evacuation of British nationals from that appalling west African country.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in