Latest news with #Pyrrhic
New Statesman
05-07-2025
- Politics
- New Statesman
Could Gaza unite the new left against Keir Starmer?
Photo by Henry NichollsAFP via Getty Images As the Labour government fits and reels, the left is organising. A week of disastrous climb-downs and workarounds from the government and their whips delivered a Pyrrhic victory over Starmer's welfare bill. But – most visibly with tears on the front benches of the House – the Starmer administration looks and feels exhausted. This is an opportune moment for Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn, two of the party's most popular and most rebellious former MPs, to break away and form their own political movement, as they did yesterday (4 July). And, speaking to MPs this week, it seems that the issue the left inside and outside the party is going to hammer the government hardest on going forward will be the war in Gaza. Prior to the escalation of the conflict between Israel and Iran, it seemed as though a turning point had been reached among MPs on the conflict. A heated urgent question on 4 June taken by the Foreign Office minister, Hamish Falconer, saw MPs from all parties in agreement. Enough was enough, they said, and the government must act: Israel should be sanctioned, and the UK should halt all arms sales. But in the weeks since the situation in the Middle East began to worsen, all eyes have been on Iran, Israel and the USA. Gaza has fallen from the headlines and from the political agenda. But the strength of feeling among MPs outraged with the government remains. Rachael Maskell, the quietly determined leader of the welfare rebellion, believes Gaza will be the next crunch point. The Labour MP for York Central said, 'You could tell the frustration that we've got through watching this genocide unfold. The government just feels like it's standing and looking on and not acting.' She described the 'major frustration' on the backbenches around the government's inaction and, in her opinion, its complicity. 'What the whole of the last few days has shown to me is the importance of backbenchers,' Maskell said. 'We reach in and shout into the echo chamber,' she said, 'but what we are finding is the government never reach out.' Other MPs agreed: Brian Leishman, the MP for Grangemouth and Alloa told me that 'the endless violence has got to stop'. Though he, like Maskell, clearly plan to remain in Labour, he is equally unimpressed with the government. 'We have been inept and impotent on what's happened to Palestinian people. It's a stain on our country, it really is,' he said. 'It will reach a crescendo in the house – I think it has to, the sooner the better.' Awkwardly for the government, this is a sentiment Zarah Sultana is already channelling. She has long been critical of the government's actions on Gaza and has described it as 'an active participant in genocide'. And it is thought that she and Corbyn will now work to develop the current group of Gaza independents into a more formal movement around this issue – although Corbyn has been coy about the exact shape that will take and the timeline it will follow. Alongside Sultana, Corbyn has been agitating in the Commons over Gaza for months. 'Genocide should already be a flashpoint,' he told me. 'It should already be difficult for the government… The daily headlines of people being shot at aid sites – those should be enough for this government to wake up.' And a lot of the public would agree with him. A recent poll by YouGov for the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians found that 55 per cent of Britons oppose Israel's aggression. Over 80 per cent of those opposed said what is happening in Gaza amounts to a genocide. Many who previously voted Labour will never forgive Starmer over his approach to the conflict in Gaza; that Corbyn appears more principled on this could see more voters turning his way. In June, Corbyn brought a 10-minute rule bill which called for an independent inquiry into the UK's involvement in Gaza, which was voted through to second reading. On Friday, the government refused to give it any parliamentary time. But Corbyn has now used this as an opportunity to show up the government, criticising their unwillingness to go public on the UK's exact involvement in the conflict. 'The government is attempting to hide the truth on Gaza,' Corbyn said, 'it will not succeed.' Pointing to the inquiries which followed the war in Iraq, Corbyn added: 'This isn't over. We will uncover the full scale of British complicity in genocide – and we will bring about justice for the people of Palestine'. Though his bill may be finished, it is unlikely that Corbyn will let this issue go and it could prove a linchpin issue around which MPs attracted to his new movement begin to organise. Though none have moved yet, Sultana may yet be joined by other MPs leaving the party over Gaza. This week, 26 MPs, including nine from the Labour benches, voted against the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation which Yvette Cooper has led. They included Clive Lewis, who questioned how the Suffragettes would have been treated by this government, adding that Palestine Action's activities are 'direct action, not terrorist action'. Corbyn was, predictably, also opposed. He said: 'The proscription of Palestine Action, for example, is a truly shocking misuse of state power.' The rebels were led by the Mother of the House, Diane Abbott, and also included Ian Byrne, Nadia Whittome and Richard Burgon. In the hours after the vote, which passed by 385 votes, some Labour backbenchers called on the government to remove the whip from the rebels. (This week a new direct-action group has emerged, bearing the same aims and colour palette as Palestine Action. The group's name? 'Yvette Cooper'). Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe The government has not announced any punishment for these rebels as of yet. But if the whip is removed from these MPs in this moment, when momentum is picking up over the creation of a new party, it could drive more than just MPs into Corbyn and Sultana's hands. Analysis shared with the New Statesman by Stack Data Strategy found that Labour is losing more voters to the left than to the right (the party is currently retaining just 60 per cent of its 2024 voters). A new leftward movement, with a coherent leadership and strategy could therefore prove deeply damaging to Labour's majority at the next election. It equally makes Keir Starmer's focus on winning votes back from Reform a high-risk strategy. But the left of politics is a competitive space, and there are others jostling for these voters. Zack Polanski, the Green London Assembly member, erupted onto the scene in May with a leadership bid calling for 'eco-populism'. Polanski is clearly aiming to emulate a left-wing Corbynite style of leadership; and he has opened his arms to some of the former Labour leader's previous devotees, such as the economists Grace Blakeley and James Meadway, the latter of whom previously joined the Green Party in order to vote for Zack. Though he has not won yet, some claim that there has been an uptick in the party's membership numbers since Polanski announced that he was running. To Polanski, the government's perceived ineptitude on this crisis is the Green party's opportunity. 'Gaza is the biggest moral litmus test of our time, and it speaks to exactly why the Green party need more MPs and why I am running for leader,' he said when we spoke over the phone. 'I want to see the government using their voice on this, not equivocating,' he said. 'The reason we're not hearing [about Gaza] more often in parliament is simply because we don't have the right people elected,' he said. In his leadership bid, Polanski has been talking to MPs on the Labour left, almost encouraging them to join him and his campaign. 'I say the same thing to left-wing MPs both privately and publicly,' he said, 'you're not leaving the Labour party, the Labour party has left you.' (When I interviewed him in May, Polanski told me he would 'roll out the red carpet' if he is elected for the Labour MP Clive Lewis and for Zarah Sultana). As the chaotic announcement of Sultana and Corbyn's plans to co-found a new left-wing party unfolded, Polanski said he would await the detail, but he reiterated: 'I still think though we'd all be so much stronger and more effective if they joined the party with 4 MPs and over 800 councillors – the Green Party!' This is a tense moment. The government's actions on Gaza have for a long time now seeded resentment among the left of the party. If Starmer does decide to remove the whip from the Palestine Action rebels, it could spark even more defections or desertions. And now a new force on the left, however chaotic, is slouching towards Westminster, all but endorsed by the Prime Minister's populist predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. If Keir Starmer is not careful, taking his eye off the ball on Gaza will only serve to galvanise the left. [See also: A new force is stirring on the left] Related
The Herald Scotland
04-07-2025
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
What have they done? We'll all rue the cost of Labour rebels' actions
Perhaps these two ministers should just have resigned, explained why, precipitated the increasingly inevitable Greece 2009-type collapse facing this country and triggered the brutal policies that entails. The world has moved on from the draconian undertones of the 1834 Poor Law's "deserving and undeserving poor", but surely few could disagree with the argument put forward by former Labour MP Tom Harris this week that the objectives of reform should be aimed "squarely at those who have given up trying to get a job and have decided they would prefer to rely on benefits long-term". Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven. A Phyrric victory Keir Starmer's concessions on his welfare bill resulted in little more than a Pyrrhic victory which has left him wounded and extremely vulnerable. Who will ever believe him again when he tries to portray himself as the man who will take difficult decisions when he fails to stand by them? From the outset of his premiership, he has tied himself to the apron strings of his Chancellor who is to him the one to make Britain's economy grow again, a faith he has but very few others now share. His future is inextricably bound up with hers. So, if she fails, he fails. If she offers her resignation as a result of the effects of the pressure put upon her by the adverse criticisms of her role as Chancellor, it would be natural to assume that he would also jump ship not long after. Read more letters It is rumoured that there is the sound of sharpening knives being heard in the Labour ranks to find replacements for both of them. Should such a double whammy occur, the only course of action open to the Government would be to call an immediate election, which would send a shiver down the spines of what were formerly considered our two main parties. It is so hard for any politician to relinquish power that it would be unsurprising to see him soldier on while at the same time making it virtually unlikely that Labour would be a viable political force again. In this Government came with mighty promises of creating a dynamic economy where investment and growth would lift us out of the despond of a flatlining economy and create a country where prosperity and sound public services would march hand in hand. The febrility of our electorate with the 24/7 insensitivity of non-stop social media has left us with a country unwilling to make sacrifices to secure a stable future where everyone benefits. Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. Scotland ahead in poverty fight Recent analysis shows that levels of relative poverty in Scotland have been lower than in the UK as a whole for the last two decades. This is surely a vindication of the policies pursued and adopted by successive Scottish governments over that time and strongly suggests that Holyrood administrations have been far more effective in looking after the needs of the people they represent than those in Westminster and the Senedd. To give some examples, in 2024 the level of relative poverty in the UK was 21% while Scotland stood at 20% (England and Wales were slightly above the UK figure). In terms of child poverty Scotland's percentage fell from 25% in 2021 to 23% last year. In both England and Wales rates in 2024 were 31%, exactly the same as in 2021. (Steve Witherden, Labour MP for Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr has indicated he would be in favour of the Welsh Government introducing something similar to the Scottish Child Payment.) The relative poverty rate for people of pension age in Scotland was 15% in 2024 compared with 16% for the UK as a whole. If the Scottish Government can outperform the UK and Welsh administrations in such a key measure of quality of life with one hand tied behind its back, as at present, we can only imagine how far ahead an independent Scotland would be. Our country simply cannot afford to be held back any longer. Alan Woodcock, Dundee. Indy in EU is a viable option Ewen Peters (Letters, July 2) argues that Scotland is doing less well than recent figures on foreign direct investment suggest. He seemed concerned that Scots might be encouraged towards independence. Mr Peters wrote: "In the Trumpian era of unpredictable tariffs, the experience of our Irish neighbours flags the dangers and risks of placing your most important economic eggs in the inward investment basket." Yet however fierce international trade wars become, Ireland can rest secure in the knowledge that as a member of the EU it has tariff-free access to the 27 member countries. Scotland does not have that and the Brexit damage over time gets worse and not better. Scots might well conclude that independence back in the EU is indeed a viable option and perhaps one that offers greater prosperity than remaining in the UK. Jackie Kemp, Edinburgh. Nothing special Malcolm Parkin (Letters, July 3) tells us that 'one goodish aspect of Britain is that one can spout nonsense on one day and still be at the same address the next day'. The same can be said of any country in Europe and of most countries in the world including the many independent states. There is nothing special about Britain in this regard. David Clark, Tarbolton. Stop the grandstanding I read your front page headline ("Minister's pledge in new bid to beat homes shortage", The Herald, July 3) with a sense of déjà vu. The "pledge" not to roll back on a target of 110,000 affordable homes by 2032 put me in mind of similar "pledges" to complete the dualling of the A9 where the Government continued to maintain that the time schedule was still achievable long past the time when it was glaringly obvious that it could not be done. The Housing Secretary talks of the need to have a "challenging" target. I feel that a large part of the current lack of confidence in/disillusion with governments and politicians stems from too many headline-grabbing so-called challenging pledges issued with no detailed plan or schedule or realistic funding provision to ensure delivery of the pledge. Past experience also tells us that without measurable milestones to monitor ongoing progress, the author of the pledge is generally safely ensconced in another government role before the chickens of failed achievement come home to roost. The Government would have far more credibility if it delivered against realistic targets rather than grandstanding with targets and programmes grabbed out of thin air. John Reid, Dunblane. • Màiri McAllan, when questioned as to the credibility of the target "to deliver 110,000 affordable homes by 2032" states: "I think it is. I think that it will require us to step up." Indeed. It seems that someone failed to inform Ms McAllan that delivering upon promises is an essential part of the job. Merely stating a target doesn't cut the mustard. Yes, Ms McAllan, you will to need to step up. Maureen McGarry-O'Hanlon, Jamestown. Housing Secretary Màiri McAllan (Image: PA) Swinney is no leader I read the article by John Swinney (''There is nothing wrong in Scotland that cannot be fixed'', The Herald, July 1) with growing despair. He asserts that most people are realistic about the challenges facing Scotland, conveniently omitting that the "challenges" are mainly as a result of his and his Government's inept handling and lack of honesty in accepting this. The article demonstrates clearly that he lacks leadership, and that he and the Government do not have any idea what the key priorities are for the Scottish people. I have never read a more wishy-washy article containing nothing of substance but "motherhood and apple pie". One saving grace was that he did not invoke the old chestnut that the answer to all our challenges is independence, God help the people of Scotland with this man as leader. Douglas Eadie, Bonhill.
Boston Globe
17-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Boston Globe
Get an early peek at the new Ken Burns documentary about the American Revolution
Advertisement Two snippets from the documentary are now available for viewing online. The Mark Feeney is a Globe arts writer . L-R: Filmmakers David Schmidt, Sarah Botstein, and Ken Burns. Stephanie Berger The clip offers two elements familiar to Burns devotees. The camera pans over a painting of the battle, and viewers hear from two talking-head experts. One, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Rick Atkinson, calls the battle, won by the British at great cost, 'a Pyrrhic victory of the first order, four of the most awful hours of combat in American history.' Advertisement The English historian Stephen Conway elaborates on that, noting the British casualty rate that day was 40 percent. Conway adds that that would remain the highest percentage of casualties for the British Army for more than 140 years, until the first day of the Battle of the Somme, in World War I. That bloody day in Charlestown would loom large in British decision-making over the course of the next eight years. Mark Feeney can be reached at
The National
06-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Peace in Sudan is to be found at the negotiating table, not in the courtroom
Today's decision by the International Court of Justice to dismiss a case brought against the UAE by Sudan is the right one. However, the case – which accused the Emirates of backing the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in a war that has devastated Sudan since April 2023 – represents a disappointing waste of time, money and political capital that would have been better used trying to end this tragic and damaging conflict. It is the second time in little over a week that unpersuasive allegations about the UAE from Sudan's military-backed leadership have failed to find support. On April 29, The National saw a copy of a 42-page report compiled by the UN Panel of Experts on Sudan and submitted to the Security Council that detailed many alarming atrocities carried out by the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF but contained no findings against the Emirates. Dr Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the UAE President, said the report debunked 'false SAF accusations against the UAE'. Those who took the case to The Hague on March 6 may have believed that, despite it having little chance of success, it would deflect attention away from the Sudanese military's own detrimental role in the war. There are plenty of reasons why such a deflection needed to be a powerful one, capable of capturing international attention. The rise of Islamist elements on the SAF's watch, taking advantage of the chaos to impose their agenda, poses a serious threat to Sudan's future not only by perpetuating the current war but by sowing the seeds of future conflict. Last week, it was reported that the UAE had thwarted a plot to smuggle weapons and military equipment to the Sudanese army involving a private plane, five million rounds of machinegun ammunition and a list of notable Sudanese intelligence and business figures. Meanwhile, Sudan's people continue to suffer. This week, Sudanese refugees told The National about their return to the capital, Khartoum. The war-torn city lacks electricity and running water amid sky-high food prices, scarce healthcare services and a precarious security situation. When such accounts are added to regular reports from international humanitarian organisations warning about the anguish of Sudan's civilian population – UN figures say out of an estimated total population of 50 million, at least 13 million have been displaced by the war – one can understand the need to direct international attention elsewhere. Instead, today's events at The Hague highlight the real issues facing Sudan: the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire, meaningful talks to permanently end the war and restarting the process of building a civilian-led government. The alternative is a debilitating military stalemate that threatens to destabilise neighbouring countries such as Chad and South Sudan, or a Pyrrhic victory for one side or another that will inherit a devastated and divided nation. The work to prevent either scenario should not take place in international courts – it should take place around the negotiating table and among the Sudanese themselves.
The National
05-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Peace in Sudan is to be found at the talks table, not in the courtroom
Today's decision by the International Court of Justice to dismiss a case brought against the UAE by Sudan is the right one. However, the case – which accused the Emirates of backing the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in a war that has devastated Sudan since April 2023 – represents a disappointing waste of time, money and political capital that would have been better used trying to end this tragic and damaging conflict. It is the second time in little over a week that unpersuasive allegations about the UAE from Sudan's military-backed leadership have failed to find support. On April 29, The National saw a copy of a 42-page report compiled by the UN Panel of Experts on Sudan and submitted to the Security Council that detailed many alarming atrocities carried out by the Sudanese Armed Forces and the RSF but contained no findings against the Emirates. Dr Anwar Gargash, diplomatic adviser to the UAE President, said the report debunked 'false SAF accusations against the UAE'. Those who brought the case to The Hague on March 6 may have believed that, despite it having little chance of success, it would deflect attention away from the Sudanese military's own detrimental role in the war. There are plenty of reasons why such a deflection needed to be a powerful one, capable of capturing international attention. The rise of Islamist elements on the SAF's watch, taking advantage of the chaos to impose their agenda, poses a serious threat to Sudan's future not only by perpetuating the current war but by sowing the seeds of future conflict. Last week, it was reported that the UAE had thwarted a plot to smuggle weapons and military equipment to the Sudanese army involving a private plane, five million rounds of machinegun ammunition and a list of notable Sudanese intelligence and business figures. Meanwhile, Sudan's people continue to suffer. This week, Sudanese refugees told The National about their return to the capital, Khartoum. The war-torn city lacks electricity and running water amid sky-high food prices, scarce healthcare services and a precarious security situation. When such accounts are added to regular reports from international humanitarian organisations warning about the anguish of Sudan's civilian population – UN figures say out of an estimated total population of 50 million, at least 13 million have been displaced by the war – one can understand the need to direct international attention elsewhere. Instead, today's events at The Hauge highlight the real issues facing Sudan: the urgent need for an immediate ceasefire, meaningful talks to permanently end the war and restarting the process of building a civilian-led government. The alternative is a debilitating military stalemate that threatens to destabilise neighbouring countries such as Chad and South Sudan, or a Pyrrhic victory for one side or another that will inherit a devastated and divided nation. The work to prevent either scenario should not talk place in international courts – it should take place around the talks table and among the Sudanese themselves.
