Brits and Americans who rightly hold Palestinians responsible for electing a terrorist government have some house cleaning to do – our own governments appease terror-supporting voters.
The UK, along with France and Germany, just spent 2 years fruitlessly negotiating with the Mullahs, and one reason they failured was they refused to threaten force:
Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, has consistently made clear that Britain opposes a military solution. He fears that even the threat of bombing will sabotage any hope of securing a united international diplomatic front against Tehran – as well as again splitting the Labour Party.
The Mullahs correctly judged that – absent both carrots and sticks – they could use the talks to buy 2 years’ weapons development. Since this just put off the day on which either the US or Israelis whack the Mullahs, why did the Brits behave this way (my emphasis)?
Much has been made of the large number of Muslim voters in Mr Straw’s Blackburn constituency, where his party’s vote in last year’s general election was down by 12.1 per cent and the performance of the anti-war Lib Dems up by 12.5 per cent. Blackburn was merely a vivid example of a national trend that terrified Labour pollsters.
In seats where between five and 10 per cent of voters are Muslims, Labour’s vote fell by 8.1 per cent. In constituencies where more than 10 per cent are Muslims, the drop was 10.6 per cent.
This explains Blair’s appeasement of the Mullahs and reluctance to suppress domestic Muslim terror.
The US has the same problem:
Britain and the United States were locked in a deepening diplomatic dispute last night over Washington’s failure to implement a mutual extradition agreement that Parliament approved three years ago.
Congress’s refusal to ratify the deal means that Britain cannot prosecute criminals residing in the US, including sex offenders and paedophiles.
This seems odd, since the Brits have fully implemented the agreement, even stretching their own legal system to do this:
Those currently facing extradition to the US under the 2003 deal include (three Brits)who face up to 35 years in prison if convicted of Enron-related fraud charges. Their lawyers, who are appealing to the House of Lords, claim they are victims of an unequal law.
Here’s why the US government is not keeping its own side of the bargain (my emphasis):
A senior US official told The Times yesterday that the Administration was sympathetic to Britain’s concerns and hinted that a fresh attempt to force the treaty through the Senate would be made within weeks.
The official said that the problem had been caused by the influential Irish-American lobby, which is worried that the treaty could be used to pursue IRA suspects. Senators are worried about alienating any section of voters before November’s congressional elections. British diplomats have emphasized that, after the Good Friday agreement, Britain has little interest in pursuing IRA suspects.
Brit and American voters need to set an example to Palestinians by voting out all their own terror-appeasing pols.