Category: Foreign Affairs

  • Suella Braverman – 2022 Joint Statement from UK and France on Small Boat Incident in the Channel

    Suella Braverman – 2022 Joint Statement from UK and France on Small Boat Incident in the Channel

    The joint statement made by Suella Braverman, the Home Secretary, and Gérald Darmanin, the French Minister of Interior and Overseas Territories of France, on 14 December 2022.

    Early this morning authorities were alerted to an incident in the Channel concerning a small boat in distress. Regrettably, multiple fatalities have been confirmed.

    Our thoughts are with everyone affected by this tragic event, and on behalf of the UK and France, we send our deepest condolences to the loved ones of those involved.

    There has been a coordinated response to this terrible tragedy, with UK and French actors working side by side. We commend the engagement of all those involved.

    This tragic incident – like the loss of at least 27 people on 24 November last year – is a stark reminder of the urgent need to destroy the business model of people-smugglers.

    We have prevented more than 30,000 crossings so far this year, and together with other European partners, including Europol, we have made over 500 arrests since 2020.

    We recently agreed on a renewed bilateral framework to tackle illegal migration, with closer joint working and intelligence sharing, more French officers equipped with cutting-edge technology patrolling the French coast and UK and French officers working with each other’s law enforcement teams as embedded observers.

    We also held a meeting in Calais format (Germany, Belgium, France, Great Britain, Netherlands) in Brussels on 8 December and resolved, with our European neighbours, to intensify our police, border and judicial cooperation, with the support of EU agencies.

    Today’s tragic incident underlines the importance of taking this forward together.

  • Tom Tugendhat – 2022 Speech to Policy Exchange

    Tom Tugendhat – 2022 Speech to Policy Exchange

    The speech made by Tom Tugendhat, the Security Minister, at Policy Exchange on 13 December 2022.

    I’d like to talk about an evolving threat that we are seeing, an emerging threat, which is of course state threats to our democracy and indeed others.

    I think we should start by recognising what a remarkable achievement the United Kingdom is. It’s not just four nations come together but actually a patchwork of many more nations than that under a single flag.

    It wasn’t that long ago in historical terms, just over a thousand years ago that people owed allegiance to kings in Kent and Fife, in Ulster and Strathclyde. But those kingdoms have intertwined and through a combination of stories and law we’ve made ourselves into one of the most extraordinary countries in the world. We’ve exported stability, we’ve exported principles and the regulations that have constructed a world of free trade and freedom that has made so many prosperous and enabled so much happiness.

    Now this unity was built on shared stories of our past, creating what has become a firm foundation for our future. And it was only possible because the stories that we were able to tell each other, the stories, the myths, the histories turned around to bind the people together. To give us a common foundation. A common root. But those stories that unite can also divide, and today we are seeing that shared understanding fray, we are seeing stories twisted and corrupted deliberately to sow confusion and division.

    We’re seeing threats to our politics and, because of that, to our nation.

    And, I’m not saying this just because I happen to be a very strong unionist, and I believe that our union is one of the pillars of liberty in the world. I don’t need to make that argument – our role in the United Nations, in NATO, in the Commonwealth, in the World Trade Organisation and many, many other organisations besides points to the essential role that our union has had in creating a safer and more prosperous world. I make the argument because we’re not just dealing with just competing narratives today, we’re dealing with false ones.

    Disinformation matters. It can shape debate and it can change outcomes.

    Now this is because democracy isn’t just an event, it’s a process. It’s how we talk to each other, not just how we decide the future in a ballot box. But how we shape that future through discussion. It’s as much about journalists, lawyers, businesses and civic activists as it is about politicians.

    Fundamentally, it’s about citizens. How we participate, what we do, in every community, is just as important as what is done to us.

    That’s why joining political parties, getting together with friends and neighbours, championing ideas and choosing candidates, is the bedrock of our democracy and the heart of our freedom.

    Because democracy can no more be reduced to an election than an economy can be reduced to a market.

    Defending it demands us to understand what matters throughout our society, not just on polling day.

    Now, some have understood this better than many in free countries. They see the source of our strength and have understood the levers that can be used to weaken us.

    Spreading division and lies, challenging the narratives that enable our national conversation and debate, make us less resilient, more brittle and at greater risk.

    And our response must be about more than just protecting politicians or elections.

    I don’t want to confuse however debate for division. It’s entirely right for us to debate our constitution and our laws. It is essential for our freedom that we do.

    We should argue and disagree. A 99% approval rating may sound wonderful if you’re North Korean, but it is truly the sign of a dictatorship not of a democracy.

    What is critical is that we should know where the arguments are coming from. We should know that these debates are triggered by the interests of our nation and our communities. By the peoples who we should rightly be representing.

    We shouldn’t be having them triggered by outside forces and a hidden hand. For too long, foreign interference has been slowly creeping into British democracy.

    And as Security Minister, much of what comes across my desk is acute threats. Quite obviously those are the ones that we respond to immediately.

    But it is the strategic threats to our democracy – because the acts are part of a systematic campaign over a long period of time, to degrade our sovereignty – that concern me most.

    They are threats not just to life; they are threats to our way of life.

    This emerging era of state-based threats isn’t just Le Carré – it’s not the silent battle of shadows – but a challenge to our future and to our society.

    And it’s not a secret that state-based threats are growing and coming from many different sources as competition intensifies, impacting countries across the world including the United Kingdom and our allies.

    Now we’ve seen Russia’s abhorrent and illegal invasion of Ukraine. We’ve seen the attacks around Europe, indeed, the Estonian Ambassador is here and who can talk about the attacks we’ve seen on his great country over the last decade or so. We’ve even seen attacks here in London and in Salisbury, that have sadly cost the life of one British individual and one Russian.

    Now from China we’ve seen increased militarisation, and the growing tension over Taiwan.

    And Iran’s malign behaviour in the Middle East directly threatens our partners and our interests, they are brutally suppressing courageous people in the streets who are calling for an end to the control of a corrupt and corrupted religious and security elite claiming authority from God.

    All of this is clear, much of it has been clear for some time.

    What’s new is that we’re seeing this grow at home.

    During the Covid pandemic, we saw Moscow try to sow disinformation. We saw fake news bots, trying to promote different arguments, false arguments on social media.

    In our universities we’ve seen debate silenced by voices controlled by Beijing, and now, we’re seeing Tehran try to exploit similar routes.

    As the head of MI5 put it recently, the Iranian regime is projecting its campaign to silence dissent directly to the UK, with at least ten such threats since January, as he said. Now, as recently as last month, I – along with other MPs – were sadly given security guidance because of the Iranian threat.

    Since Ken McCallum’s speech just a few weeks ago, we have seen even more out of Iran. This has is not and has not yet finished.

    And we’ve seen states including China and their United Front Work Department try to silence incredibly courageous academics, who are trying to exercise the freedom that every academic in the United Kingdom should enjoy.

    All those are attempts to silence our national debate and to shape our democracies.

    All of those demand responses.

    There is a deeper layer. The activity that hides itself in online platforms and undermines our democratic discourse is like a poison seeping through the body politic. It’s degrading the media environment and attacking our free speech.

    Russian disinformation on Twitter is increasingly obvious. And the bots that we’re seeing attack Ukrainian voices or try to silence those calling out the Kremlin’s human rights abuses in Syria are now often, thank goodness, written about.

    And as the Foreign Affairs Committee, which I was privileged to chair, reported in 2019, Chinese-encouraged smothering of dissent, even beyond its borders, is another.

    That’s why we need to look beyond the sources of disinformation and to its channels.

    As Ofcom reported, only recently, the reach of newspapers and online sources has fallen from roughly a half in 2020, to below 40 percent in just two years. Over that same period, TikTok has gone as a news source, from having 1 percent to 7 percent take up.

    Now that may not sound like a lot, but when you look at the group of younger people, 16-24 year olds, you’ll see that the figure is much higher. Instagram, YouTube and TikTok are all about a third of the news sources young people turn to, outstripping their reliance on the ITV or BBC networks.

    The influence of social media platforms on our younger generations here in the United Kingdom and around the world is pervasive. The content on these platforms will, of course, influence minds. Yet it’s worth noting that foreign states hold considerable sway over the algorithms that are the editor on these sources.

    The challenge for a free country like ours is how we manage this debate. How we keep a society free and open as the last Integrated Review committed us to, quite rightly, while defending ourselves from the dishonesty that could tear us apart.

    The same challenge applies to the platforms themselves. They profit from the liberty that allows the trade in ideas and goods. Ensuring they defend that liberty is not asking them to be altruistic, it’s asking them to invest in their own futures.

    We believe in the liberty of shared views, we believe in the liberty of ideas, we also believe in the liberty of cat videos. But we also need to balance all of this with the reality of the world that we live in.

    To update to the Integrated Review, we are going to have to consider many of these issues in the round and the challenges that they pose to us all.

    And when it comes to tackling foreign influence and malign activity, our National Security Bill, currently in the House of Lords, will modernise our outdated laws and provide the foundations for being better able to protect our people and our institutions from state-based threats.

    Specifically, our Foreign Influence Registration Scheme has been created to tackle covert influence in the United Kingdom.

    The scheme’s aims are twofold, to strengthen the resilience of the United Kingdom political system against covert foreign influence and to provide greater assurance around the activities of specified foreign powers or entities.

    Those who are working on covert political interference will I’m afraid face a simple choice: they will have to register and highlight the activities they seek to hide, or not – and risk prosecution.

    The scheme will not impose restrictions on legitimate activities of people or businesses – it is here to encourage openness and transparency – and it is necessary precisely because we know that those who wish to do us harm are using the shadows to evolve new techniques.

    Together, these threats challenge our democracy. Some are state threats, others are from groups trying to distort us for other reasons.

    This government – is taking them all extremely seriously.

    The Prime Minister has demonstrated he’s serious about it and about tackling state threats, and the specific threat to our democratic resilience, by asking me to lead the Defending Democracy Taskforce.

    Now, this is not just about guarding ministers or protecting technology. Nor even about MPs and those elected across our country to serve our communities in the parliaments and assemblies and councils. Despite the tragedies that all of us have seen in recent years, despite the recognition that is so important, that is not only what this is about. It’s about making sure that all of us, as citizens, are free and able to debate the ideas and choose the future that makes us strong.

    Its primary focus will be to protect the democratic integrity of the United Kingdom from threats of foreign influence.

    We will work across government and with Parliament, the United Kingdom’s intelligence community, the devolved administrations, local authorities, the private sector and civil society on the full range of threats facing our democratic institutions.

    It will be looking at foreign interference in our elections and electoral process; disinformation; physical and cyber threats to the democratic institutions and those who represent them; foreign interference in public office, political parties and universities; and what we call transnational repression. What we mean by that is the activity of those who seek to stifle free expression in diaspora communities in the UK, those who try to silence the debate that they, as anyone else in the United Kingdom, should be able to enjoy. We have seen the most recent example of this in the so-called overseas police stations that China has set up around the country, and indeed around the world.

    I’ve reached out to Five Eyes partners and I am keen to work closely with European and other international friends to tackle state threats together. This is not just a British problem. This is a problem that all democracies face and sadly too many autocracies are trying to use.

    Over the past decade we have seen the evolving threat to our national life and begun to understand the form it is truly taking.

    The challenges we face to our democracy and national security from state-based foreign threats, now and in the years to come, are serious, complex and abundant.

    They will not be solved quickly. They will not be solved by government acting alone.

    All of us, individuals and organisations, have a role in defending our freedoms, and we best start by understanding and debating the threats that we face.

    For all of our achievements as a country – from innovation and scientific discovery, to economic prosperity, cultural wealth and the cohesion that has made this country so extraordinarily rich and strong – it is our freedom that enables it all.

    As we look to the challenges of the future – and yes, there are many – the essential lesson of the past is that dictatorships may look solid in the short term, but they can’t manage change. Real stability, real resilience, comes from debate, from discussion and the democracy that flows from it.

    Protecting democracy is essential to us all.

  • Drew Hendry – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    Drew Hendry – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    The speech made by Drew Hendry, the SNP MP for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey, in the House of Commons on 12 December 2022.

    Thank you, Mr Speaker.

    I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Baron) on securing this important urgent question. It is morally indefensible that, more than a year after the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, there are still innocent Afghans who worked for the British Government and military who have received zero support from this Government and the Home Office. It is not acceptable to use terms such as “something like.” Exactly how many former British Council staff, including support staff, are still living in Afghanistan in fear of their lives and livelihoods? When the Government say they have brought 6,300 Afghans to “safety,” what exactly does that mean? How many of them are former British Council employees?

    The Taliban’s so-called kill list is an active threat. Do the Government know how many of their former employees are on that list? Finally, it is appropriate that 540 staff are working on the Ukraine schemes but, if the Government are taking Afghanistan as seriously as they are supposed to be, why do the figures show a maximum of eight people working on the Afghan schemes?

    Mr Mitchell

    The frustration expressed by the hon. Gentleman is shared by many of us. It is not possible to quantify the figures in precisely the way he requests, but I will ensure that we write to him with the closest possible approximation.

  • Fabian Hamilton – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    Fabian Hamilton – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    The speech made by Fabian Hamilton, the Labour MP for Leeds North East, in the House of Commons on 12 December 2022.

    I again thank the hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Baron) for securing this urgent question. He has been a great champion of the British Council in this place. We know that hundreds of British Council contractors are still stranded in Afghanistan following this Government’s botched evacuation from Kabul. Earlier this year, the Minister told the House that the Government were “supporting those in need” and that 50 British Council contractors had been evacuated. However, a recent report in The Guardian indicated that, as the hon. Gentleman said, the Government had not granted a single ACRS application since the programme was opened—not one. Furthermore, fewer than 10 staff are currently working on the scheme at the FCDO.

    I am contacted frequently by British Council contractors who are suffering terribly, and I would be grateful if the Minister would allow me to raise these cases with him privately. Many of those that are still in Afghanistan are former security guards who protected British staff at the embassy, and they undertook an extremely difficult task during the evacuation in August last year. We owe so much to those courageous British Council contractors, and the fact that they are still in Afghanistan and facing daily violence and threats as a result of their co-operation with the UK is nothing short of a disgrace.

    The last time I put these questions to the Government, answers were not forthcoming, so I am hopeful that this time I might be able to get some clarity. Can the Minister tell us how many former British Council contractors are still stuck in Afghanistan, what measures are being put in place to evacuate the rest of the British Council contractors still stranded in Afghanistan and what engagement he has had with regional partners to facilitate safe passage for British Council staff who attempt to leave? And message does it send to other British Council contractors who work in challenging environments around the world if the UK Government will leave these contractors stranded in this way?

    Mr Mitchell

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments, and he is quite right to express deep concern about those who are caught in this way. He asks me whether he may raise cases privately with me, and of course the answer is yes. I will make arrangements for those meetings to take place straight after this urgent question is over. He asks a number of questions, and if I do not answer them fully, I will ensure that we write to him. He is right to say that we keep in very good contact with regional partners in countries to try to advance this issue. This particular stream only opened in June this year. The Foreign Office has processed and is informing something in the region of 200 of those who are eligible in principle, and if the dependants are added to that, it is something like 750. So those are proceeding, and it is of course up to the Home Office to procure the necessary security clearance prior to them securing entry clearance. So, the process is going on, but I fully accept his frustration—it is a frustration we all share in this matter—and as I say, perhaps we can proceed with a private meeting, as he has requested.

  • John Baron – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    John Baron – 2022 Speech on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    The speech made by John Baron, the Conservative MP for Basildon and Billericay, in the House of Commons on 12 December 2022.

    Thank you for granting the urgent question, Mr Speaker. Let me start by both welcoming the Foreign Secretary’s speech on foreign policy this morning, which called for a long-term, resilient approach that will build the long-term, trusting relationships that this country needs for the future, and underlining the fact that that is precisely the purpose of the British Council, which has been building connections for this country throughout the world, quietly, consistently and effectively, since the 1930s. I hope that the Minister sees, as I do, the key role that the British Council can play in helping to achieve those objectives.

    I make no apologies for asking this urgent question, because people’s lives are at risk. I went through the regular channels a year ago, and was told that progress was being made, which is more or less what the Minister has just said. I raised it again in October/November, but there has been no response. The progress has not been made.

    For more than 16 months since Operation Pitting and the fall of Kabul, about 200 British Council contractors and their families have been stuck in Afghanistan. As has recently been highlighted in the media, many of them are in hiding and in fear of their lives, unable to seek medical advice when it is necessary for themselves and their families, and family members have died as a consequence. As the Minister said, British Council contractors are eligible under ACRS pathway 3, but those 200 or so contractors remain stuck in Afghanistan because of a blockage of red tape here in the UK. Until that blockage is cleared they will remain in danger, possibly for a second Afghan winter. Since its launch in January, the scheme has not repatriated a single person from Afghanistan: I have received confirmation of that from the British Council. In July and August, an application window closed for the contractors to submit expressions of interest. British Council employees worked at pace with the FCDO to identify those who had actually worked with them, yet there has still been no progress whatsoever. Having used all the regular channels, I would now like to ask the Minister to do all he can before Christmas to clear these blockages and get these contractors back to the UK.

    Mr Mitchell

    I thank my hon. Friend for what he has said. He eloquently extols the brilliance of the British Council. I had some responsibility for it 10 years ago, and I know very well that what he says about it is entirely correct. He is quite right about the eligibility, and we very much understand the urgency to which he refers. This particular pathway process started on 20 June and remained open for eight weeks. The Foreign Office has looked at every single one of the applicants, and the process is moving through. I would just say that, although it is taking a lot of time, it is right that officials should look carefully at each and every one of those cases. There is a balance to be struck, but I will ensure that my hon. Friend’s words and concerns are reflected across Government as a result of this urgent question.

  • Andrew Mitchell – 2022 Statement on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    Andrew Mitchell – 2022 Statement on British Council Contractors in Afghanistan

    The statement made by Andrew Mitchell, the Minister of State at the Foreign Office on 12 December 2022.

    The Minister who is responsible for Afghanistan—the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Leo Docherty)—is travelling. I am a poor substitute, but I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Baron) for raising this very important matter.

    During Operation Pitting, nearly all British Council staff and some contractors were evacuated and offered resettlement through the Afghan relocations and assistance policy. Some British Council contractors, plus dependants, remain in Afghanistan and are eligible for consideration for resettlement under the Afghan citizens resettlement scheme. The scheme will see up to 20,000 people from Afghanistan and the region resettled in to the United Kingdom. It provides a safe and legal route for some of those affected by events in Afghanistan to come to the United Kingdom and rebuild their lives.

    The first year of ACRS pathway 3 is focused on eligible at-risk British Council and GardaWorld contractors, as well as Chevening alumni, honouring the commitments made by the Government to those three groups. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office opened an online process on 20 June this year to seek expressions of interest in resettlement from those groups. They have played a key role in supporting the UK mission in Afghanistan, and it is right that we are honouring the commitments made during the evacuation to support those at risk. Up to 1,500 people from Afghanistan and the region will be referred for resettlement in the UK in the first year of pathway 3, including eligible family members.

    The FCDO received more than 11,400 expressions of interest, which are being assessed in terms of eligibility. People are being notified of the outcome, and we are sending names to the Home Office for security checks. Once the checks have been completed, we will provide advice on the next steps for those who are being referred for a place on the ACRS. It remains a priority to honour the commitment made to eligible at-risk British Council contractors, and to offer a route for resettlement in the UK under the scheme. I want to thank the council for its excellent co-operation with the FCDO to date, as we work together to resettle eligible contractors under pathway 3.

    We are doing everything we can to bring the first British Council and other arrivals under pathway 3 to the United Kingdom as soon as possible, where we will help them to rebuild their lives. Anyone who is eligible and resettled through the ACRS will receive indefinite leave to remain in the UK, and, under existing rules, will be able to apply for British citizenship after five years in the UK. This is one of the most ambitious resettlement schemes in our country’s history, and we are proud to offer a safe and legal route to those affected by events in Afghanistan.

  • G7 + Ukraine – 2022 Joint Leaders’ Statement

    G7 + Ukraine – 2022 Joint Leaders’ Statement

    The statement made by the G7 and Ukraine on 12 December 2022.

    We, the Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7), met on 12 December, to reflect on progress of our cooperation under Germany’s Presidency to jointly address global challenges at a time of severe geopolitical crisis and critical moment for the world economy. We were joined by Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This year in the face of Russia’s illegal, unjustifiable and unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine, we stood more united than ever, together with Ukraine and in unwavering commitment to our shared values, the rules-based multilateral order and international cooperation.

    Today, we reaffirm our unwavering support for and solidarity with Ukraine in the face of ongoing Russian war of aggression for as long as it takes. We condemn Russia’s continuous inhumane and brutal attacks targeting critical infrastructure, in particular energy and water facilities, and cities across Ukraine, and recall that indiscriminate attacks and attacks on the civilian population or civilian objects, constitute a war crime. We also condemn those who are facilitating Putin’s illegal war. We are determined to help Ukraine repair, restore and defend its critical energy and water infrastructure. We will help Ukraine in meeting its winter preparedness needs, will continue to support Ukraine’s civilian resilience, and will further enhance our efforts on this during the international conference to be held in Paris on 13 December. We are determined that Russia will ultimately need to pay for the restoration of critical infrastructure damaged or destroyed through its brutal war. There can be no impunity for war crimes and other atrocities. We will hold President Putin and those responsible to account in accordance with international law. We reiterate that Russia’s irresponsible nuclear rhetoric is unacceptable and that any use of chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons would be met with severe consequences.

    Building on our commitments so far, we will continue to galvanise international support to help address Ukraine’s urgent short-term financing needs. We ask our Finance Ministers to convene shortly to discuss a joint approach for coordinated budget support in 2023. We affirm that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) should be central to this effort.

    We firmly support efforts to secure Ukraine’s immediate financial stability and its recovery and reconstruction towards a sustainable, prosperous and democratic future, in line with its European path. We will build on the outcomes of the International Expert Conference on the Recovery, Reconstruction and Modernisation of Ukraine held on 25 October in Berlin, as well as at the Ukraine Recovery Conference on 21-22 June 2023 in London. In particular, with a view to supporting Ukraine’s repair, recovery and reconstruction, together with Ukraine and our international partners and in close coordination with relevant International Organisations and International Financial Institutions, we will establish a multi-agency Donor Coordination Platform. Through this platform, we will coordinate existing mechanisms to provide ongoing short- and long-term support – with particular responsibility by the Finance Track for short term support – , coordinate further international funding and expertise, and encourage Ukraine’s reform agenda as well as private sector led growth. We will also set up a Secretariat for the Platform. We will each designate a senior government representative to oversee the set-up of the platform and ongoing coordination efforts, and ask them to convene as soon as possible in January 2023.

    With a view to a viable post-war peace settlement, we remain ready to reach arrangements together with Ukraine and interested countries and institutions on sustained security and other commitments to help Ukraine defend itself, secure its free and democratic future, and deter future Russian aggression in line with its rights enshrined in the UN Charter.

    We will continue to coordinate efforts to meet Ukraine’s urgent requirements for military and defense equipment with an immediate focus on providing Ukraine with air defense systems and capabilities.

    We also reiterate our strong condemnation of Russia’s continued seizure and militarization of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant, the abduction and reported abuse of Ukrainian personnel, and the willful destabilization of its operations. We support the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) efforts to establish a Safety and Security Zone.

    Russia’s war of aggression must end. To date, we have not seen evidence that Russia is committed to sustainable peace efforts. Russia can end this war immediately by ceasing its attacks against Ukraine and completely and unconditionally withdrawing its forces from the territory of Ukraine. We welcome and support President Zelenskyy’s initiative for a just peace.

    We remain committed to our unprecedented coordinated sanctions measures in response to Russia’s war of aggression. We will maintain and intensify economic pressure on Russia and those who evade and undermine our restrictive measures. We will continue to shield vulnerable countries that are severely impacted by the repercussions of Russia’s war of aggression and its weaponization of energy and food.

    We reaffirm our intention to phase out Russian-origin crude oil and petroleum products from our domestic markets. During the week of 5 December 2022, the price cap on seaborne Russian crude oil entered into force in our respective jurisdictions, delivering on our commitment to limit Russia from profiting from its war of aggression against Ukraine, to support stability in global energy markets and to minimize negative economic spillovers of Russia’s war of aggression, especially on low- and middle-income countries. We encourage third countries that seek to import seaborne Russian-origin crude oil and petroleum products to leverage the price cap. We reiterate our decision that the price cap on Russian origin petroleum products will enter into force on 5 February 2023.

    Russia’s war in Ukraine is exacerbating existing fragilities in the global economy, with direct impacts on the cost of living of people in our own countries, and on the world’s most vulnerable. We will continue to use all available policy tools to maintain global financial, macroeconomic and price stability and long-term fiscal sustainability, while providing targeted support to those most in need and working collaboratively to strengthen our collective economic security to external shocks and wider risks. We will make public investments and structural reforms to promote long term growth. We will further coordinate to respond to the urgent needs of most vulnerable countries and will encourage private investment in developing and emerging markets as a key enabler of sustainable economic pathways.

    We will keep up our ambition to address global food insecurity, including through the Global Alliance for Food Security. We will keep supporting the delivery of grain and fertilizers to vulnerable countries in need and welcome the recent operations led by the World Food Programme (WFP) on this front. We welcome the extension of the Black Sea Grain Initiative (BSGI) alongside further efforts to bring Ukrainian food to the world, namely the European Union’s Solidarity Lanes and the “Grain from Ukraine” Initiative.

    Reaffirming our steadfast commitment to implement the Paris Agreement and the outcomes of COP26 and COP27, we commit to urgent, ambitious, and inclusive climate action in this decade to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre industrial levels. We reaffirm our commitment to reach net-zero emissions no later than 2050. To that end, and building on our statement adopted in June in Elmau, we endorse the Climate Club’s terms of reference as established by the Climate Club Task Force and hereby establish an open and inclusive international Climate Club. Focusing in particular on the decarbonisation of industries, we will thereby contribute to unlocking green growth. We invite international partners to join the Climate Club and to participate in the further elaboration of its concept and structure. In doing so, we will continue working closely together with relevant international organizations and stakeholders. We ask the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in tandem with the International Energy Agency (IEA), to host an interim secretariat working together with other international organizations.

    Recalling our commitment to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030, we will work intensively towards a successful outcome at CBD COP15, in particular the adoption of an ambitious and effective global biodiversity framework, with clear and measurable targets and its prompt and swift implementation. In this regard we are committed to mobilising resources from all sources and to substantially increasing our national and international funding for nature by 2025 to support the implementation of ambitious global framework. We encourage countries beyond the G7 to join us in this endeavor.

    Accelerating our contributions to the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) to make our global partners a better offer on sustainable, inclusive, climate-resilient, and quality infrastructure investment, we welcome the progress on the Just Energy Transitions Partnerships (JETP) with South Africa and Indonesia as flagship projects for multilateral cooperation, just energy transition and sustainable investment and look forward to swiftly concluding negotiations on a JETP with Vietnam, as well as to making further progress with India and Senegal. We will intensify our cooperation within a PGII working group to deliver on our joint ambition to mobilize up to 600 billion dollars by 2027, and on JETPs, we will coordinate through the JETP working group.

    Reaffirming our full commitment to realise gender equality and to consistently mainstream gender equality into all policy areas, we welcome the key recommendations by the Gender Equality Advisory Council (GEAC) and look forward to receiving the GEAC’s full report by the end of the year. We thank this year’s GEAC for its important work, reiterate our intention to convene the GEAC as a standing feature of all G7 Presidencies, and look forward to further strengthening it.

    This year, we have achieved progress to improve the global health architecture with the WHO at its core, our capacity to prevent, prepare for and respond to future global health emergencies and to achieve universal health coverage, especially through the G7 Pact for Pandemic Readiness endorsed in Elmau. We welcome the successful Seventh Replenishment of the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund). We will step up our efforts on training and qualifying health workforce as well as strengthening surveillance capacities to detect outbreaks and variants as early as possible by integrating the One Health approach. We will continue to support science to develop safe and effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics.

    Under the German Presidency, we, the G7, together with other international partners, have demonstrated our resolve to jointly addressing both major systemic challenges and immediate crises of our time. Our commitments and actions pave the way for progress towards an equitable world. As we look to the 2023 G7 Summit in Hiroshima under the Japanese Presidency, and in our support to the Indian G20 Presidency, we stand strong, united and absolutely committed to rebuilding a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable future for all.

  • James Cleverly – 2022 Speech on Human Rights Day

    James Cleverly – 2022 Speech on Human Rights Day

    The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 12 December 2022.

    As you gather to mark International Human Rights Day:

    • in Ukraine, civilians gather in shelters from bombardment, as prosecutors gather evidence of atrocities and sexual violence, committed by Vladimir Putin’s forces
    • in Iran, brave peaceful protestors continue to gather on the streets in spite of the brutal crackdown. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps report that the average age of those arrested is 15. We know many are young girls, who have gathered the courage to call for freedoms they’ve never had before
    • in Afghanistan, women and girls are also being targeted. And erased from all spheres of public life
    • and in China and Russia, we’ve seen protestors so concerned about speaking out, that they hold aloft blank sheets of paper

    2022 has been a bad year for the respect for human rights in many, many countries.

    If you take a step back for a moment, all this evidence confirms my belief, that autocracy and repression are always fundamentally wrong, and fundamentally destabilising. And that human rights, and transparent democratic government, are in the interests of all people, all economies and the long term stability of every nation.

    That is why I believe in human rights. There are now 8 billion people on this planet, and each and every one should be able to enjoy their rights and fundamental freedoms, as set out in the Universal Declaration and subsequent Conventions, and I will do all I can as Foreign Secretary to ensure that they can.

    On Friday, on International Anti-Corruption Day, the UK government announced a package of sanctions targeting those involved in serious human rights abuses and violations, and serious corruption. Sanctions are one of a wide range of diplomatic and development tools that we will use to promote human rights, to promote freedoms, and to promote democracy.

    We will continue to shine a spotlight on human rights violations – including through the UN Human Rights Council.

    We will not shy away from difficult conversations – be it on the arbitrary detention, torture or forced labour in supply chains.

    We will offer advice and expertise to improve human rights adherence – as we do with countries across the world.

    We will strengthen our partnerships with allies to promote and protect rights and accountability – as we did at the PSVI Conference.

    We will defend the international human rights system – and use it to hold those who violate or abuse human rights to account.

    Hand-in-hand with standing up for human rights, we will continue to build democratic resilience, promote civil space, and nurture the institutions of free and open societies. Central to which, we will continue to support and work with civil society, particularly human rights defenders and free media.

    Because human rights cannot be fully enjoyed without democratic freedoms. And democratic freedoms cannot be fully realised where there is a lack of respect for human rights.

    Human rights, underpinned by democratic values and the rule of law, have the power to unite, to transform lives, and to change the world for the better. As Foreign Secretary I will work tirelessly with all our allies to promote and protect them.

  • James Cleverly – 2022 Keynote Speech on Foreign Policy

    James Cleverly – 2022 Keynote Speech on Foreign Policy

    The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, at the Foreign Office in London on 12 December 2022.

    Good morning,

    We are at peace, we are prosperous and we live on an island– so why do we bother doing foreign policy at all?

    Why did I visit Kenya and Ethiopia last week and Poland and Romania the week before that? Why do the ministers of this department travel around the world, why do we have officials across the globe?

    Well let’s go back to first principles and remind ourselves what we are collectively trying to achieve.

    For most of our history, the world has been dominated by the brutal maxim that the “strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”.

    Might was always right, and power was all that counted and nations down the centuries seemed grimly compelled to vindicate Shakespeare’s warning:

    Power into will, will into appetite; and appetite, a universal wolf, so doubly seconded with will and power, must make perforce a universal prey and last eat up himself.

    As Foreign Secretary of a former imperial power, I know that in the past we succumbed to the temptation of will and appetite.

    And none of us can forget how, in the 20th century, aggressive tyrants made the globe their prey, starting two world wars and leaving over 100 million people dead.

    And afterwards our predecessors realised that humanity would not survive another catastrophe of that scale.

    So a generation of far-sighted leaders built an assembly of international rules and institutions designed to make law – not power alone – the arbiter of relations between states.

    Britain joined hands with the United States of America, with France and nearly 50 other nations to create the United Nations.

    And the UN General Assembly adopted a Universal Declaration of Human Rights without a single dissenting vote, proclaiming – and I quote – the “inalienable right of all members of the human family”.

    In the same era, 23 nations founded what would become the World Trade Organisation and the World Bank began to fund reconstruction and recovery across the globe.

    For all the tragedies and bloodshed of the last eight decades, the remarkable truth is that by historical standards, that system has worked.

    Between 1946 and 2020, the number of deaths in state conflicts as a share of global population fell by 95 percent.

    And only once since the foundation of the UN has a member country been wiped off the map, with its entire national territory annexed by another.

    That act of aggression, by Iraq against Kuwait in 1990, was swiftly reversed.

    The volume of world trade has multiplied 40 times since 1950, generating countless jobs and livelihoods in every corner of the earth.

    And in recent decades, the fastest economic growth has been concentrated in the developing world.

    When I was born in 1969, around half of all humanity lived in absolute poverty.

    Today that figure is below 10 percent, which is all the more astonishing when you consider that the world’s population has doubled in that same time.

    And ponder the enormity of the simple fact that global infant mortality has been cut in half over the last three decades.

    That’s another way of saying that millions of children have been spared what would otherwise be agonising deaths.

    Now, none of this would have been possible without the institutions of the post-war world, protecting billions with global vaccination campaigns, investing in development and infrastructure, upholding freedom of the seas and maintaining open shipping lanes.

    The international order has allowed more of our fellow human beings to live in peace and prosperity than ever before.

    And that is the single most important reason why British foreign policy strives to renew its founding principles and its institutions.

    We should remember that we’re not propping up a system that only benefits us,

    or keeps others down.

    On the contrary, just as we have prospered, so other countries have thrived alongside us – often faster than us.

    Now we don’t believe everything is perfect; and we’re not standing in the way of reform.

    In fact, the UK wants to welcome Brazil, India, Japan and Germany as permanent members of the UN Security Council, alongside permanent African representation.

    Our aim is to uphold a historic shared achievement that benefits everyone.

    And I honestly shudder to think what might follow if through neglect, or complacency or timidity, we turned away and allowed what we have worked for to be torn down.

    Consider for a moment the alternative world that Vladimir Putin yearns for.

    The reason why his onslaught against Ukraine offends every fibre of my being is not simply that it’s morally abhorrent, although of course it is.

    And it has nothing to do with the accident of geography that Putin is waging war in Europe.

    No, what really chills the blood is that he is prepared to destroy the laws that protect every nation and, by extension, every person across the globe.

    Putin’s goal is to turn back the clock to the era when might was right and big countries could treat their neighbours as prey.

    He is waging a 19th century war of imperial conquest, deliberately debasing international conduct, utterly contemptuous of today’s values.

    And by attacking one of the world’s biggest producers of food and fertiliser, he is driving up global prices and inflicting still greater hardship on some of the poorest people around the world.

    Hence it was Prime Minister Modi who told Putin to his face, and I quote: “I know that today’s era is not the era of war.”

    The only route to peace in Europe is for Putin to end his war and withdraw his troops.

    As we stand against the Russian invasion, the United Kingdom benefits beyond measure from our rock solid friendships with the United States of America, with France, with Germany, with Canada, Australia and many others.

    Last Friday, we announced how we will develop the next generation of combat aircraft hand-in-glove with Italy and Japan.

    These vital relationships, constructed over generations, embedded in institutions like NATO and the G7, amount to our greatest source of strength and the foundation stone of British democracy and diplomacy.

    Today we have no higher priority than to support our Ukrainian friends until they prevail, as they inevitably will.

    But that will not be enough to sustain the international order unless its principles and institutions command the support of the world beyond Europe and North America.

    We are living in a momentous period of history when the pace of change is accelerating at hurricane force.

    As recently as 2001, 80 percent of countries conducted more trade with the US than with China.

    Yet by 2018 there had been an almost complete reversal: nearly 70 percent of nations trade more now with China than the US.

    And in the coming decades, an ever greater share of the world economy – and therefore the world’s power – will be in the hands of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

    Together they will decide whether the international order will endure. That reality has been evident for some time, but I am not convinced that British diplomacy has fully caught up.

    My goal is to build on the work of my predecessors and ensure that we do catch up – and under me that task has begun.

    Our diplomats are not pundits in the commentary box, offering their thoughts and analysis: they are players on the field.

    The goal of foreign policy is not to comment but to make a difference. Britain has agency Britain has influence, Britain has leverage and it is my job to use it.

    So I will make a long term and sustained effort to revive old friendships and build new ones, reaching far beyond our long-established alliances.

    My starting point is that we don’t view the changing balance of power with any sense of loss or regret.

    The reason why the world’s geopolitical centre of gravity is moving south and east is precisely because hundreds of millions of people have escaped poverty.

    And that, that is the single most wondrous development of my lifetime.

    And it’s a vindication of the world order, s vindication of free trade, of international development, of innovation and scientific advance, in fact everything that Britain has spent generations working for.

    Now, we have to recognise that the UK’s future influence will depend on persuading and winning over a far broader array of countries,

    countries in the Commonwealth, in the African Union, in ASEAN and elsewhere.

    Many are old friends; others we know less well. They often describe themselves as “non-aligned” and they are wary of committing themselves in any direction just because other countries want them to, and that is exactly as it should be.

    Our job is to make our case and earn their support, investing in relationships based on patient diplomacy, on respect, on solidarity, and a willingness to listen.

    Because this isn’t about dictating or telling others what they should do: we want a balanced and mutually beneficial relationship, based on shared interests and common principles.

    And that means learning from our competitors and always thinking 10, 15, 20 or more years ahead.

    Because in the past I think perhaps we have been too transactional and too impatient.

    Now we must have strategic endurance, a willingness to commit to relationships for decades to come.

    Now, confession time. Despite my best efforts, I’m willing to concede that I am unlikely to be Foreign Secretary in 25 years’ time, which is a shame because it is a job that I love.

    But I want to make sure that our diplomacy is focused on that time horizon. Because the interests that we are protecting and the values that we are promoting will outlive any and all political cycles here in the UK.

    And we need to recognise that at first, this work will feel like water on stone:

    no swift dividends, no windfall gains, perhaps even no visible impressions at all for a short while, and there will be plenty of temptation to question that effort.

    But we would curse our complacency if we did not try, because these relationships will be essential to our shared successful futures.

    And the reality is if we are not good friends, you can bet that others will try to fill that void and seize any opportunity that we might be mistaken enough to give them.

    Now every country is different and every generalisation invites an abundance of counter-examples, but there are some common threads.

    The main focus of the future powers that I’m discussing is on securing their own economic development and their own resilience against threats, including from climate change, from disease and from terrorism.

    Many of these countries have enjoyed rapid success and, above all, they want that success to continue.

    Their populations are typically much younger than ours: the median age here in the UK is over 40, while in Brazil it’s 33, in Indonesia it’s 30, and in India it’s only 28.

    More than anything else they need to generate growth, create jobs and satisfy the aspirations of their youth.

    And that means attracting investment, it means seizing the full benefit of their own natural resources, and it means harnessing the power of new technology.

    It means decarbonising their economies in a way that spreads the gains and minimises the losses, thereby achieving a “Just Energy Transition”.

    In all of these fields and many others, our opportunity is to show that the UK can be and will be a reliable, trustworthy and long term partner.

    And I am determined that we will make investments of faith in the countries that will shape the world’s future.

    So we will press on with developing clear, compelling and consistent UK offers,

    tailored to their needs and our strengths, spanning trade, development, defence, cyber security, technology, climate change and environmental protection.

    Because we know that in the coming decades there will be economic shocks, and climate change will have its baleful effects, and countries will want technology, finance and access to markets to support their development.

    That’s why, in the last year, the UK has offered guarantees to allow almost £5 billion of extra multilateral finance for the developing world, and we support the ambitions of the Bridgetown Agenda to reform the financial system and unlock more resources.

    And we will offer a reliable source of infrastructure investment through the British Investment Partnerships, through UK Export Finance, and through the G7 Partnership for Global Infrastructure.

    We’ve got the message and we know that resources need to flow more quickly from these initiatives into real projects on the ground.

    And we will make full use of the powers we have regained by leaving the EU, including the ability to sign free trade deals, and Mutual Recognition Agreements, designed to encourage innovation and reduce trading costs.

    The UK has a range of capabilities to support emerging economies with young populations to achieve their goals.

    And whatever our differences, there are core principles behind which I believe every nation can unite.

    We all say in the UN Charter that we believe in sovereignty and territorial integrity, which means the right of all countries to decide their own future and set their own path, without being invaded or dismembered.

    That’s why 143 nations – three quarters of the entire membership of the UN – voted in the General Assembly to condemn Putin’s annexation of Ukrainian territory.

    And that’s why defensive alliances like NATO are so important – because they help countries to protect themselves from aggressors.

    When powerful states like China reject defensive alliances as “bloc politics”, they either misunderstand the desire of every nation to live in peace, without fear of aggression; or they perhaps provide a signal of intent, especially chilling from a country militarising at a pace that the world has rarely seen before.

    For our part, Britain will demonstrate our long-term commitment to the Indo Pacific, including by joining the Trans-Pacific free trade agreement as soon as possible.

    We will deepen our cooperation with India, the new president of the G20, and finalise our trade agreement with them.

    We will support Indonesia and South Africa with their plans for Just Energy Transition, showing how the necessary investments can be mobilised at scale,

    and last week the EU and the UK reached an ambitious agreement to do the same with Vietnam.

    But in the end, all our fortunes will depend on a stable and peaceful international order.

    My generation was born long after the Second World War and we reached adulthood just as the Cold War was coming to an end.

    We stand on the shoulders of wise and compassionate leaders who created the laws and institutions that prevented a universal relapse into the old order, where the strong prey upon the weak.

    Now the UK must work with our international allies and new partners to sustain the best of this achievement, which seeks to protect every country and create the setting for everyone to prosper.

    That’s why our diplomats and our development experts make the effort; that’s why I fly somewhere almost every week, that’s the ministers in this department do likewise, that’s why I’m striving to build the partnerships of the future, so our country can flourish, alongside our friends, both old and new.

    Thank you.

  • Iain Duncan Smith – 2001 Speech to the American Enterprise Institute

    Iain Duncan Smith – 2001 Speech to the American Enterprise Institute

    The speech made by Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative MP for Chingford and then Leader of the Conservative Party, in Washington DC, the United States, on 30 November 2001.

    Nothing, of course, will ever remove from our memories the horrific attacks – in this city and in New York – that took place on September 11. It is still almost impossible to comprehend what happened on that day, or to understand the hate that could motivate men to carry out such evil deeds. The grief felt throughout the United Kingdom on that day was real and heartfelt.

    They were attacks on Britain’s staunchest ally and Britain’s greatest friend. Yet they were attacks on us all and on the shared values that we hold dear. Over 4,000 people were brutally murdered from over 80 countries. In terms of loss of life, they were the worst terrorist outrages in British history too. So my message is simple – we are in this together.

    If one thing has stood out since September 11, however, it has been the indomitable spirit of the American people never to bend the knee to terrorism. The response of your nation, under fire, has demonstrated to the whole world why the spirit of freedom and democracy will always triumph over evil and terror. And the leadership given by President Bush and others, such as Rudolph Guiliani, has been quite outstanding.

    Such an atrocity could not go ignored or unpunished. The guilt of Bin Laden, and the Taliban regime that harboured him, was beyond any reasonable doubt. Having been shown some of the intelligence by the Prime Minister, I am quite clear that they are guilty as charged. That is why the British Government, with the backing of my Party, was right to give its full support to the President in taking whatever course of action he felt appropriate.

    Our aims in Afghanistan have been clear all along. The removal of the Taliban regime and its replacement by a more broadly-based government, bringing Bin Laden to justice and dismantling his Al-Qa’eda terrorist network.

    The first of these – the removal of the Taliban – is now virtually assured. UN sponsored talks are currently taking place about the formation of a new Government. Hopefully the shape of that Government will emerge quickly so that some stability can at last be brought to a people who have suffered so much from a succession of tyrannical regimes.

    And the net is closing in on Bin Laden. The professionalism of our Armed Forces – American and British – will ensure that either he is brought to justice or that justice is brought to him.

    The success that has been achieved in recent weeks is a vindication of the strategy pursued by the international coalition, with the United States at its head. We must see it through to the finish and not be distracted by those who, for whatever reason, call for an end to the bombing before our task is properly completed.

    Yet, while the war in Afghanistan might just be beginning to have an end in sight, the war against terrorism is emphatically not over. It must go on.

    You have called this particular part of the Conference “Confronting the Terrorists”. To me, that encapsulates neatly what I believe to be the overriding joint purpose of our two countries, not just in Afghanistan, but wherever terrorism rears its evil head or finds sanctuary.

    We in the United Kingdom have had to face terrorism for too long. Thousands of people have died as a result – enough is enough. If September 11 told us one thing, it is that terrorism today knows no limits. There is no weapon they will not use, and no life they are not prepared to take. We need to realise that these people are fanatics who will stop at nothing. That is why we have to stop them. If we fail to maintain the pressure on terrorism everywhere, then we are all at risk.

    Winning the war against terrorism requires us to fight it on all fronts. It means tackling the terrorist organisations direct. It means drying up their sources of finance. It means tackling the links between terrorism and organised crime. And it means dealing with those rogue states that for too long have been able to get away with harbouring terrorists and using them for their own twisted purposes.

    A clear lesson is that the days of the safe havens are over. We are no longer prepared to tolerate your activities. That goes for Afghanistan, just as it should for other countries we know, and can show, are involved in international terrorism. Where these states are unwilling to take effective action against terrorism they must be prepared to face a determined response from the wider international community – and I hope that the United Kingdom will continue to be at the forefront of that response.

    As Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, made absolutely clear just over a fortnight ago: ‘we are in this for the long haul’.

    And certainly I agree with President Bush when he says that there can be no further justification for the continuing Iraqi failing to abide by the Gulf War ceasefire obligations to allow UN inspectors back into the country to monitor its weapons of mass destruction. As Richard Butler has made clear, Iraq has used the three years since UNSCOM was kicked out to build up its arsenal.

    The events of September 11 also shattered one of the post-Cold War illusions that we no longer faced any direct threats. In fact the threats today are many and more varied than ever before – from the car bomber to the rogue state with ever more powerful weapons of mass destruction – nuclear, chemical or biological. Nobody can be in any doubt that if Bin Laden had been able to lay his hands on a nuclear device then he would not have used it.

    As I have said before, proving one threat does not disprove another. And against many of these threats we are currently literally defenceless. That is particularly the case when it comes to ballistic missiles. It makes them the weapon of choice for the terrorist or rogue state bent on blackmail or carnage.

    Traditional methods of arms control will not solve the problem. Those countries, like Iraq, are the least likely to observe treaties. Stemming the flow of military technology to these countries might delay their ability to develop weapons of mass destruction but we cannot guarantee that it will halt it. Preventative defence, seeking to bring these countries within the family of civilised nations, clearly has a part to play, though in a number of cases we are a long way from that.

    That is why it is essential for us to look collectively at new ways of strengthening our defences. In this context I reiterate my Party’s backing for President Bush’s plans for the development of an effective ballistic missile defence shield – for the United States and her allies – in which the United Kingdom plays a full role.

    Far from holding back on missile defence, I believe that the events of September 11 have made it all the more important to press ahead.

    Confronting the terrorists must mean all terrorists. As far as I, and the Conservative Party, is concerned terrorism is indivisible. What happened in the United States is the same as that which has been carried out in the United Kingdom, and in particular in Northern Ireland. The only difference is scale. Even then we should never forget that some 3,600 people have lost their lives in terrorist violence associated with Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland’s First Minister, David Trimble, and I argued last week, there is no moral difference whatever between those who planned and carried out the attacks on the Pentagon and the Twin Towers or those who planned and carried out Enniskillen, Omagh, Greysteel and countless other atrocities over 30 years.

    Nor is there any difference between the illicit trade in drugs that helps to finance the terrorist operations of Al-Qa’eda and the illicit trade in drugs that sustains the activities of Republican and Loyalist Paramilitaries in Northern Ireland.

    Over the years the IRA has clearly established links with international terrorist organisations. Much of its weaponry was supplied courtesy of Colonel Gaddafi. In August, three suspected IRA members were apprehended in Colombia suspected of collaborating with the narco-terrorist group FARC. The IRA is in many respects the prototype for international terror groups and the organisation from which they draw inspiration.

    And even with the current ‘ceasefires’, and the IRA act of decommissioning, the terrorist threat from dissident groups remains high. So we need to continue to confront the domestic terrorist threat in the United Kingdom.

    When Gerry Adams said in New York recently, ‘those who support us know the difference between what’s been happening in Ireland and what happened in this city on September 11′ – he is wrong – there should be no equivocation about our response to terror.

    We agree that because a person has a violent past, it does not mean they cannot have a future if they renounce violence completely. We want the peace process to succeed. Yet we should never fall into the trap of those who would claim there are different categories of terrorist or, worse still, ‘good terrorists’ and ‘bad terrorists’. Do that and we are a short step from giving legitimacy to all terrorist violence. The dead of the United Kingdom are testament to that.

    This will not be an easy road – it will not be a quick journey – but the United States and Britain have been together for too long to weaken now. Together in defence of freedom.

    We must be strong in the face of tragedy – relentless in the pursuit of evil – resolute in the fight and just in victory.