Downing Street Says » PM’s Speech

The PMOS said that the Prime Minister’s speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet tonight would defend this country’s relationships with both the US and Europe saying that we had a unique role in relation to both. He would say:

Asked whom the Prime Minister thought was "ridiculing American arguments and parodying their political leadership" the PMOS said that it was a general comment rather than a particular comment. It was addressed at those who refused to engage in the arguments and concerns that America had. Equally however the Prime Minister was also saying that it had to be a two-way street. Asked if the Prime Minister believed the arguments about democracy should also be applied equally to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia the PMOS said that as we had said before the Prime Minister believed that democratic states were more stable. He was not going to be drawn into a checklist of particular countries but what you had to do was work within the circumstances you had and at the moment in the Middle East and in Iraq there was an opportunity and in Afghanistan we had already begun to realize that.

Asked if the Prime Minister had conveyed to President Bush the message in his speech "I am not, repeat not, advocating a series of military [solutions]" the PMOS said that as the Prime Minsister had said in reference to Iran that no one had been suggesting a military solution in regard to that problem and indeed we were beginning to see some progress in Iran.

Asked how the Prime Minister thought that American policy was "evolving" and whether he thought it was becoming more multilateralist the PMOS said that what we had heard from President Bush in his remarks at the press conference on Friday was, for instance in relation to Palestine, that he thought now there was a possibility of moving towards a democratic Palestine. He had also been the first US President to support a two state solution so we could see an evolution there. This was something that depended on the circumstances in particular regions but where there was an opportunity the Prime Minister believed we should take advantage of that to push for democracy.

Asked about the section where the Prime Minister talked about the reform of the UN to provide greater leadership, asked if that was suggesting changes in the UN Charter for rules allowing military intervention the PMOS said that as was said at the time of the Iraq vote the UN should be a way of addressing issues not avoiding them. What we had seen with Kofi Annan and the High Level Group was that the UN was addressing those issues. We wanted them to continue to do so. Therefore what the Prime Minister was doing was rowing in behind the UN’s own efforts to reform the institution. What the Prime Minister was being very clear about was that the UN’s principles should be those that protect human rights and do act as a bulwark against the abuse of human rights in those countries. Asked if that would also give cover for the invasion in Iraq the PMOS said that people should not regard this as a design to give cover for one particular circumstance. What it was trying to do was to lay out a set of principles and those principles were those behind democracy. To take three examples: first what we had seen achieved in Afghanistan where women who had been barred from any public role under the Taliban were those that turned out in greatest numbers in areas that had been dominated by the Taliban to vote for a President. Second, in Iraq we were seeing a struggle to hold elections but that was a struggle the Interim Government was determined to win. Thirdly, in Palestine we were seeing a move towards a more transparent form of elections. These were welcome developments and ones the Prime Minister believed would bring stability in the world.

Asked if the UN were to write into its constitution the assumption that countries that abused their citizens were offending UN laws and therefore was it not an assumption that gave UN the right to act the PMOS said that people should not prejudge the outcome of the UN report but equally we had to face up to the obligation of being a member of the international community and being a member of the UN.

Asked if the speech could be taken as a signal that the PM would hope that Colin Powell’s replacement would sign up to those principles of multilateralism the PMOS said that if you looked back at the PM’s speech to congress people could see many of these messages there. That said things had evolved since then and the speech tonight echoed that evolving situation. This was not a message to any particular individual or country but rather it was an overall message about how we should respond to the evolving international situation and to look at optimistically at the increasing desire of peoples in suppressed countries for democracy.

Asked what evidence there was that this Administration was not unilateralist the PMOS noted that the US did go through the UN and did try for a second resolution and that the coalition was working in Iraq. But in terms of how we go ahead from here the message was about Europe and America. Whilst everyone recognized the tensions which came out of Iraq, those tensions should now be resolved. Europe and America should work together in regions like Palestine and in the broader Middle East. Equally the Prime Minister had said that post 9/11 the world had changed and that if you let problems fester his analysis was that lead to the development of terrorism as had been seen. Therefore it was best to address those issues up front. How you did so would vary from country to country and circumstance to circumstance and as he would say in the speech he was not advocating a military solution to every problem. If a country abused its obligations to its own citizens that should be reflected in what the UN did. The UK’s input into Kofi Annan’s report had been fed in through our UN offices and reflected this thinking. It was much more likely that citizen’s rights would be protected in a democratic state and the circumstances and opportunity to establish democratic states would vary. In Palestine there was that opportunity now and that was something the Prime Minister believed should be seized.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Monday, November 15, 2004

PM’s Speech

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries