Us politics

There’s almost as much talk about ‘virtue-signalling’ these days as there is about ‘fake news’. But one thing that doesn’t get said often enough is why virtue-signalling isn’t just irritating, but destructive. Like Brendan, Will and others here, I also take a slightly dim view of the anti-Trump protests that took place in Britain last night. I walked around the one in Westminster to come to a view, and found myself feeling unsympathetic to people carrying placards that said, for instance, ‘Fuck Fascism’. It’s a sentiment with which most of us can wholeheartedly agree, but I cannot see its applicability to the question of whether or not the US President

The Afghans on the road in Serbia were wet from the rain. They were trying to hitch a ride into the border town of Presevo to make the way north to Hungary. Later I saw them sitting next to a train station drying their socks. Did they fear for the future? ‘This is nothing, we came from Syria,’ one of them said. That was in 2015 at the height of the refugee crisis as more than a million people sought refuge in the EU. Many of them had fled the conflict in Syria. But the traffic of people was not all in the same direction: Afghans, Lebanese, Tunisians, Uighurs from China, Hazaras

It’s been said a lot that, for all the supposed closeness between Russia and the new US administration, the Trump-Putin axis could soon turn into dangerous enmity. Strange friendships make fast feuds. And if Trump is a proper nationalist, if he is the thin-skinned narcissist that everybody says he is, he will react strongly against the widely held idea that he is some orange Kremlin patsy. What then should we make of the departure of Michael Flynn, Trump’s national security adviser? Flynn has resigned amid allegations that he misled Vice President Mike Pence as to the nature of some telephone calls in December with the Russian ambassador to the US.

Well there you have it. After almost two weeks of braying and spluttering about Donald Trump’s immigration plan, it turns out the public supports the proposed visa ban after all. Here in the United States, a poll by Morning Consult and Politico last week revealed that 55 per cent of voters back Trump’s executive order, while only 38 per cent oppose it. In Europe, the results are even more jarring: when asked whether immigration from mainly Muslim countries should be halted entirely, 55 per cent of the 10,000 people asked by Chatham House agreed. Davos folk might have taken umbrage at Trump’s executive order, yet compared to the type of policy that voters think should be implemented, the Donald’s plans suddenly look like a halfway house. Europeans

‘Plan, prepare, and train for the outbreak of chaos,’ says al Qaeda’s handbook, The Management of Savagery, a blueprint for building the Caliphate through what might be called creative destruction. ‘At the outbreak of chaos, the onset of jihad: ride the wave…exploit the situation.’ Did Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s new chief strategist, read The Management of Savagery? He has been accused of implementing a ‘chaos theory of government’. Create chaos. Destroy the old order. Build paradise. The Trump administration has seemed busily engaged in phase one during its first two, hair-raising weeks in office. For the critics, the military raid against al Qaeda in Yemen was the inevitable outcome —

Well, now… would you just look at this. I’d read it here if I were you because I suspect it won’t be covered on the BBC News tonight. A large majority of Europeans are in total agreement with Donald Trump in his restriction upon immigrants from Muslim countries. Here are the figures. Now, never mind what I think. And for that matter, never mind what you think. Simply accept that the shrieking at Trump and from that idiotic, jumped-up thick-as-mince dwarf, Bercow, weighing in with his two pennorthworth, is a million miles from how the majority of people in our continent view the matter. Again, this is not about my point

John Bercow has taken a lot of flak for his comments about Donald Trump. The Speaker has been accused of being an embarrassment to Parliament for saying Trump wouldn’t be welcome to address MPs during a state visit. But amidst all the fury, Bercow’s pre-emptive ban does touch on a deeper question about the muddled thinking in British foreign policy. Several autocrats, many with poor human rights records, have addressed both Houses of Parliament: Emperor Hailie Selassie of Ethopia in 1954, Nikolai Bulganin of the Soviet Union in 1956, and his successor Alexei Kosygn in 1967, have all done so. And during Bercow’s time as Speaker, the Emir of Kuwait and President

John Bercow has just declared that he will oppose an invitation for Donald Trump to speak in either Westminster Hall or the Royal Gallery when, or should that be if, the US President comes on a state visit to Britain. The Speaker of the House of Commons’ opposition makes it extremely difficult for any invitation to be offered for Trump to address both Houses.  Bercow’s argument is not simply that Trump hasn’t been president long enough to merit the honour, but that the Commons’ opposition to, to use his own words, ‘racism and sexism’ mean that such an invitation would be inappropriate. This is a quite remarkable slap at the