By Iliyasu Gadu
ilgad2009@gmail.com, 08035355706 (Texts only)
Last week as widely expected in Britain, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of the ruling Labour Party resigned from his position, ending speculations as to whether in the coming months he would be able to generate enough bounce to take the party to the general elections following a not so encouraging performance under his leadership at the recent council elections. In his resignation speech, Starmer stated: ”The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to that question. And I accept that answer with good grace.”
In many respects, Keir Starmer’s resignation (His parents named him after Keir Hardie, one of the founders of the Labour Party) was the perfect epitomy of a very British coup. Although Britain’s credentials as a solid democracy are well established, along the long trajectory of democratic practice, there are many instances of Prime Ministers being forced to walk the plank through the periodic fierce and brutal in-house political sniping that has become the hallmark of British politics.
In our times, we remember the bitter political dogfights orchestrated by ”the men in grey suits” who plotted the eventual downfall of popular Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Indeed Thatcher herself was a key figure in the slugfest that led to the ouster of Prime Minister Edward ”Ted” Heath whom she served as Education Secretary.
It has become a tradition in British politics for every Prime Minister to expect a revolt from within his party and it takes a heavy dose of political dexterity to survive such plots. It is little wonder that Britain is often described as the hottest political blast furnace in the world.
Starmer’s fall was typically engineered by his closest political associates. He owed his trajectory to leadership of the Labour Party and eventually as Prime Minister in the last general elections to the nudging of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. But despite the mollycoddling, that did not stop Starmer from joining hands with Corbyn’s opponents to topple the latter from leadership of the party.
Although many factors have been thrown around as being responsible for Starmer’s exit, the one factor that can be cited as the ”smoking gun” was his refusal to approve a request by President Donald Trump for Britain to join in the war against Iran.
On the surface, this may look like the appropriate thing to do considering that the United States did not appear to have consulted with Britain before launching strikes against Iran. And Starmer quite rightly chose to do what majority of the British people wanted rather than do the bidding of America’s President Trump. The fact that majority of British people with the benefit of hindsight had come to rue the decision by the Labour government of Tony Blair to join the United States in the Gulf Wars against Iraq strengthened Starmers’s decision to spurn the request by President Trump.
Although Starmer’s decision not to support America in the war against Iran rested well with the British people, it however did not please the Jewish financiers of the Labour Party. Morgan McSweeney, the former Chief of Staff to Starmer and leader of Labour Together, the influential right wing group within the party, along with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband acted as insiders of the Jewish interests that pulled the plug on Starmer.
The Jewish financiers of the Labour Party could not come to terms with Starmer declining to approve British support for a war against Iran in which the state of Israel was prosecuting despite the huge funds they have been donating to the party over the years. From there, it did not require any further confirmation that from a walking wounded, Starmer was all but a dead duck sitting in No 10, Downing Street.
Add this to the fact that Starmer’s nominated successor, Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Manchester City is cut from the same Israel/Jewish support cloth as Starmer, we get the picture of the extensive influence of Jewish power groups in British politics.
Another factor that helped sweep Starmer out of Number 10 Downing Street was the ever present Brexit. Since the exit of the United Kingdom in a referendum in 2020, the country had not been able to close the gap between expectations and reality of that momentous referendum. At the core of the Brexit referendum was the issue of immigration and perception by British citizens that belonging to the European Union as a member state was inimical to Britain’s economic, political and social interests.
Britons were persuaded by the intensive rhetoric that the protocols regarding freedom of movement under EU charter was setting Britain up to be swamped by immigrants from EU countries and elsewhere in the world taking up jobs and resulting in increase in social spending. The fact that the final word on immigration rested not with the British government but with the EU parliament in Brussels added to the sense of resentment and gave fillip to the desire to exit the EU.
But the downside is that with the exit of Starmer Britain has had six Prime Ministers now in 10 years with the 7th one in tow and the expectations that led to Brexit have hardly come to fruition. The idea that Britain was going to evolve into a Singapore-like entity off mainland Europe taking advantage of its unique position as a cross centre of regional and global economic growth without the encumbrances of belonging to any supra national body like the EU has not materialized. Britain has not made much headway in leveraging on its leadership of the Commonwealth to entice countries like India, Malaysia, Pakistan, Australia and Canada to replace the EU in terms of economic partnerships.
Therein lies the lessons for Nigeria. There is today a growing body of Nigerians who are calling for a break up of Nigeria. Like Brexit, those making such call are doing so without looking at the economic, political and social implications. The argument often touted is that Nigeria is better off allowing component parts making up the country to cast off on their own. If Britain which ranks as the sixth largest economy in the world has not been able to achieve the goals of pulling out of the EU, howbeit a component part of Nigeria would be able to navigate through the unforgiving waters of the International system?
Another lesson is that Keir Starmer’s fall is the overwhelming reflection of the wishes of the British people. Polls after polls had shown his approval rating plummeting and this was confirmed at the recent council elections with Labour making a very poor showing. Against this background, Starmer’s decision to quit is a prime example of the noble principle of enlightened self-interest.
In our clime such displays of noblesse oblige are exceptions to the rule. Political leaders rarely consider the overriding interest of the nation under such circumstances. If our political elite can learn any lessons from Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s exit, it is that democratic politics should be a matter of service and obeying the wishes of the people not otherwise.
Iliyasu Gadu, a former Foreign Service Officer who served at the Nigerian Missions in Germany and the United Kingdom (UK), is also a columnist with Daily Trust
