Lord Ha Ha
George Kerevan is a former Labour Party supporter, as I recall, who has switched his political allegiance to the SNP, but he still makes a number of very valid points about about the intervention of Lord George Robertson in the independence debate.
I was particularly interested to read about Lord Robertson's extensive business connections because it seems that like so many former politicians of that era instead of retiring quietly to the House of Lords, or doing good public works in some other way, the 'noble' lord used his contacts to launch a new business career.
Now Lord George is perfectly entitled to do that under the rules as they stand, yet if he were still active in politics, George would have to declare his business interests and connections, for reasons of propriety and transparency.
So if you ask me, George Kerevan has performed a useful service by pointing these out.
A missile is launched during Nato exercises: Lord Robertson has opened fire on Scottish nationalism. Picture: Getty
By GEORGE KEREVAN
Lord Robertson’s much-quoted observations on Scotland in Nato are ill-advised, ill-timed and illogical, writes George Kerevan
SUPPOSE that Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 had gone missing over the Atlantic. Britain would be hard put to mount a search mission because its air and naval forces are now denuded. The RAF’s entire fleet of Nimrod maritime reconnaissance aircraft were withdrawn from service in 2011, as a crude economy measure by the Treasury.
Of course, we could put up a few Hercules transport planes with binoculars, plus the odd Royal Navy frigate with a helicopter. But any passengers floating in a rubber dingy in the Atlantic are going to have to rely on the Americans, Canadians and Norwegians (who have long-range Lockheed P-3 planes) to supply the backbone of any aerial search effort,
I mention this because Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, ex- Labour defence secretary and former-secretary-general of Nato, has just made an extraordinary, over-the-top speech in Washington DC decrying the military consequences of a Yes vote in the Scottish referendum. He said Scottish independence “would be cataclysmic in geopolitical terms”.
I would reserve the phrase “cataclysmic” for, say, a Russian invasion of Ukraine, or an Iran-Israel war. I think Vladimir Putin’s annexation of the Crimea, the civil war in Syria, and North Korea’s acquisition of nuclear weapons are all dangerous threats to world security but – so far – they are containable, with a bit of diplomatic footwork. For that reason, the latter three crises have not reached a cataclysmic state. The notion that Alex Salmond running an independent Scotland ranks anywhere near them in terms of an existential security threat is, frankly, risible.
How then can George Robertson, a dour Scot from Islay, end up using such wildly disproportionate language and do so in America, as if he were Winston Churchill warning against the Iron Curtain? How can a democratic vote, carried out with not a hint of public disorder, to create a sovereign parliament in Edinburgh for a mere five million out of the UK’s 60 million citizens, constitute a threat to the world? Has George Robertson lost his marbles?
If you want to worry about threats to the security of the British Isles, might not the current ill-preparedness and under-equipment of the RAF, British Army (which is being cut by a fifth) or Royal Navy be a good start? Would George Robertson – whose tenure at the Ministry of Defence was hardly stellar – not be better off using his Washington platform to decry Britain’s lack of maritime reconnaissance aircraft?
Robertson argues: “The loudest cheers for the break-up of Britain would be from our adversaries.” Typically, he neglects to mention who these might be. However, let’s be charitable and assume Lord Robertson truly believes Scottish independence might be misconstrued by potential enemies as a sign of weakness. To the contrary, an independent Scotland not only intends to stay in Nato but to reinforce the alliance’s Atlantic flank by making up for the deficiencies of Britain’s current maritime defences.
Far from an independent Scotland (or Catalonia) balkanising the West, it is only the small, feisty European Union and Nato members who can re-invigorate Europe’s tired institutions with a common purpose. I predict the Nordic, Baltic and ex-Soviet Bloc countries in Europe will take a harder line on mutual defence than Barack Obama’s White House, which Putin is running diplomatic rings round. Note: the latest secretary-general of Nato is Jens Stoltenberg, a former prime minister of Norway.
Robertson claims that “if the United Kingdom was to face a split at this of all times and find itself embroiled for several years in a torrid, complex, difficult and debilitating divorce, it would rob the West of a serious partner just when solidity and cool nerves are going to be vital”. But disentangling Scottish interests from the UK need not be “torrid, complex and debilitating” if London negotiates in good faith. It would help if Lord Robertson himself used his Washington speeches and contacts to secure seamless Scottish membership of Nato.
Robertson again implies that Scotland will be refused Nato membership if it demands Trident nuclear submarines are removed from Faslane. Well, George, how will the Kremlin feel about Nato deliberately weakening its Atlantic front line by kicking out a founder member of the alliance? To use your own phrase, “the forces of darkness would simply love it”.
Lord Robertson’s interest in global security stems from his numerous business connections. He is a paid “senior counsellor” for the Washington-based Cohen lobbying firm, set up by his close friend William S Cohen, Bill Clinton’s defence secretary. The Cohen Group is run by a stellar bunch of ex-Pentagon generals and admirals and helps mainly US defence companies sell their wares.
The group’s website proudly states how it helped “a leading US-based global aerospace” firm snatch a $4 billion contract in Europe from under the noses of two local contractors, by arranging meetings directly with (I quote) that anonymous nation’s “Prime Minister, Defence Minister, Finance Minister, Foreign Minister, and Chairman of the Parliament’s Defence Committee”. Until last year, Robertson was deputy chairman of TNK-BP, an Anglo-Russian oil company. In 2013, BP was forced to sell its half of TNK-BP to Rosneft, a purely Russian firm, after Kremlin arm-twisting. Rosneft is 70 per cent owned by the Russian state. Its boss is Igor Sechin, Putin’s former deputy chief of staff. This experience upset Robertson, who has reverted to seeing the world in Cold War terms.
Equally, the Russians viewed the appointment to the TNK-BP board of an ex-Nato chief as an imperialist insult.
Here is the contradiction in George Robertson’s preposterous rhetoric. The Kremlin thinks it has the right to a “sphere of influence” so it can bully small countries around its borders. Yet Lord Robertson, invoking a new Cold War as his excuse, wants London and Washington to exert their “sphere of influence” over Scotland, blackmailing Scottish voters with lurid threats if they dare vote Yes.
Lord Ha Ha (9 April 2014)
Now if I recall correctly the SNP once cooked up a bit of a storm when one of its senior figures compared Labour's shadow Scottish secretary, George Robertson, to Lord Haw Haw - an infamous Nazi collaborator during the Second World War.
Like most political bun fights this one, from the pre-Scottish Parliament days, quickly blew over but I was reminded of it when I read George Robertson's bizarre remarks that a Yes vote in the Scottish independence referendum would have a "cataclysmic" effect on European and global stability.
A tad ridiculous and over the top, don't you think?
Especially as George went on to say that the "loudest cheers" after a Yes vote would come from the west's enemies and other (unspecified) "forces of darkness".
All I can say is 'keep taking the tablets', George but I do think it's hugely funny that the man has gone from Lord 'Haw Haw' to Lord 'Ha Ha' in less than 20 years.
Here's how The Herald newspaper reported the story back in 1996.
Labour anger at `Nazi' taunt by SNP chief
THE vice-president of the SNP, Alex Neil, was said last night by the party's chief executive to be apologising and withdrawing remarks comparing Shadow Scottish Secretary George Robertson to the Nazi collaborator Lord Haw-Haw.
Amid calls for Mr Neil to resign his party post and candidacy in Kilmarnock and Loudoun, he was summoned to a meeting with party leader Alex Salmond to explain the remarks. However, Mr Neil added to the furore last night by denying that he was apologising to Mr Robertson. He told BBC Scotland television: ``I am not going to apologise to George Robertson. He is the one who should apologise to the Scottish people.'' Blaming misrepresentation of his original remarks in the media, he said he had never intended to call Mr Robertson a Nazi or a traitor, but was still accusing him of deliberately denigrating the Scottish people and sapping their morale. He argued that the specific comparison with Lord Haw-Haw as a propagandist who undermined the confidence of his own people remained valid. His controversial speech had won a standing ovation at the conference in Inverness, including personal congratulations from party president Winnie Ewing. However, most of the leadership remained seated and the subsequent reaction was one of embarrassment. Mr Robertson was enraged last night on seeing television coverage of the reception the remarks received. He said: ``This was a deliberately scripted, despicable attack and no perfunctory apology from this man will extinguish the insult to me and the people in Hamilton who elected me. ``Alex Neil is clearly unfit to be a parliamentary candidate and any decent party would remove him immediately.'' Mr Robertson added: ``If the SNP think the matter is closed when senior members on the platform, including MPs, applauded that part of the speech, then they are in cloud cuckoo land. ``It certainly will not be closed in the mind of the Scottish people. The apology should come from everyone in the hall who applauded the speech. Nothing less than that and Mr Neil's removal from office will suffice.'' Mr Neil, a former Labour Party high-flier who arrived in the SNP via the Scottish Labour Party, left the meeting with Mr Salmond without comment. However, party chief executive Michael Russell said he was withdrawing the remark and apologising to Mr Robertson. The SNP hierarchy, which has been anxious recently to distance the party from extreme rhetoric and anti-English sentiment, moved swiftly to defuse the row, hauling Mr Neil in within two hours and issuing the withdrawal and apology soon after. After a tense meeting between Mr Neil and Mr Russell, the policy vice-convener emerged to state that he wanted to clarify the situation. ``I withdraw the analogy as it is open to misinterpretation. It was a joke misfired. If George Robertson has taken the remark as personally offensive then I apologise. It was meant as a political comment. ``Of course the question of George Robertson running down Scotland is a legitimate criticism which I and the SNP will continue to make. ``I believe that George Robertson also has an apology to make for his constant campaign to run down our undoubted ability to run our economy and our country successfully. As far as I am concerned this concludes the matter.'' It was, said Mr Russell, an amicable meeting at which Mr Neil had conceded that his remarks were a joke which had misfired. The incident seriously detracted from the presentation of the SNP's new highly detailed economic agenda, on which Mr Neil was speaking. He electrified an otherwise humdrum gathering by declaring: ``George Robertson reminds me of someone who was prominent during the war, a guy called Lord Haw-Haw. ``He was an Englishman employed by Nazi Germany with one sole task - to sap the morale of his own people and undermine their confidence. We in Scotland have a new Lord Haw-Haw. ``His name is George Robertson. When he tells us we cannot afford to be independent, just say to George - haw, haw.'' Mr Neil's speech was peppered with pauses for applause and he went on to say that Scottish Secretary Michael Forsyth continued to insist that a country rich in oil, gas, soil, people, skill, fish and food was so impoverished that it was left ``a mess of debt, the pauper of the Western world.'' He was embraced by party president Winnie Ewing, but the standing ovation in the hall was in marked contrast to the glum reaction of many senior figures on the platform. Mr Neil, delighted by the reception he received from delegates, said afterwards: ``The point I am making is the very narrow one that Lord Haw-Haw tried to undermine his own country. ``There is no way I am saying that George Robertson is a Nazi. I made only the very narrow point about denigrating your own country. It would be mischievous for anyone to suggest otherwise.'' Kilmarnock and Loudoun MP William McKelvey, whose seat lies eighth on the SNP list of target seats, requiring a swing of only 7%, called for him to be dropped as candidate, while party election strategist Brian Wilson said he should be stripped of his vice-convenership. Glasgow Maryhill Labour MP Mrs Maria Fyfe said Mr Neil's comments came hard on the heels of a ``grossly offensive'' and allegedly anti-English leaflet by Young Scots for Independence. Mrs Fyfe said Mr Neil was unfit to be a party candidate and should be made to resign. East Kilbride MP Adam Ingram, who earlier this week claimed an SNP branch newsletter had referred to him as the ``evil Lord Ingram'', also said Mr Neil should be dropped as a parliamentary candidate. However, the mood in the bars and foyers of the Eden Court Theatre in Inverness was that Mr Neil had made a typically barnstorming speech and the row was grossly exaggerated. The irony is that the SNP leadership has spent much time and energy recently trying to shed the image of anti-Englishness which it has generated in the past.
