Our newest ambassador in the US,,
Discussion
Murph7355 said:
Why is it "appalling"?
WTF is an ambassador doing writing stuff like that down in the first place. And then letting it get leaked.
Doesn't strike me as especially...diplomatic. Seems pretty stupid.
Whether he retires in 6mths or not is of no consequence. He's made his job all but impossible to do with any efficacy it seems.
There is plenty of outrage about Trump, faux or otherwise...but I think there needs to be much more respecting of the position rather than the man.
His job.WTF is an ambassador doing writing stuff like that down in the first place. And then letting it get leaked.
Doesn't strike me as especially...diplomatic. Seems pretty stupid.
Whether he retires in 6mths or not is of no consequence. He's made his job all but impossible to do with any efficacy it seems.
There is plenty of outrage about Trump, faux or otherwise...but I think there needs to be much more respecting of the position rather than the man.
People have a simple choice.
Back the ability of our diplomatic service to send honest appraisals of a situation to the Foreign Office without having to fear leaks or hurting the feelings of the US president.
Or put the feelings of Trump and the interests of the US first even in private diplomatic correspondence for fear it might be leaked.
Farage and Bill Cash chose the latter, to an extent so did Boris with his lack of backing last night.
The issue here isn't what Kim Darroch said, it's that ability of our ambassadors to speak candidly has been compromised and we now have a situation where Trump is essentially saying to the UK "I don't like the Prime Minister and I want an ambassador who is nice about me".
I can see the argument that once compromised it's awkward to leave Kim Darroch in place, but have no doubt Woody Johnson and every other ambassador everywhere on the planet will be doing similar things to Kim Darroch.
Personally I'd get the security services involved and use the full powers of the law to find and take action against the leaker.
I don't use the word lightly but I think their actions are against the UK national interest and borderline treasonous.
I am genuinely surprised that people really struggle to see this.
NNH said:
Time for a few facts. I'm a former civil servant, and I was fortunate enough to read the cables of some of our ambassadors and other diplomatic staff in the Middle East between 1994 and 1996. Our ambassadors pride themselves on (and are selected for) their independent thinking. I read some very bracing comments on assorted leaders and generals in the Middle East and beyond, which was very useful for policy back in London. However, the insight and opinion was provided in strict confidence, and naturally was covered by the Official Secrets Act.
Anyone who thinks Sir Kim has been "undiplomatic" by conveying his thoughts in private correspondence simply doesn't understand how our diplomatic service works. The key question is who leaked the correspondence, and why. My best guess is that one of Boris' sniveling little ar$e lickers did it, on the basis that chaos works for their proven liar of a leader.
Regrettably, Boris and his bellends have jeopardized the career of one of our finest diplomats for his usual tawdry political gain. The USA is entirely within its rights to demand that Sir Kim is replaced, unfortunately.
How seriously do you think the security services will take trying to identify the leak?Anyone who thinks Sir Kim has been "undiplomatic" by conveying his thoughts in private correspondence simply doesn't understand how our diplomatic service works. The key question is who leaked the correspondence, and why. My best guess is that one of Boris' sniveling little ar$e lickers did it, on the basis that chaos works for their proven liar of a leader.
Regrettably, Boris and his bellends have jeopardized the career of one of our finest diplomats for his usual tawdry political gain. The USA is entirely within its rights to demand that Sir Kim is replaced, unfortunately.
I find it hard to believe that this kind of damaging action won't have consequences and will be accepted as "leaks happen".
NNH said:
Time for a few facts. I'm a former civil servant, and I was fortunate enough to read the cables of some of our ambassadors and other diplomatic staff in the Middle East between 1994 and 1996. Our ambassadors pride themselves on (and are selected for) their independent thinking. I read some very bracing comments on assorted leaders and generals in the Middle East and beyond, which was very useful for policy back in London. However, the insight and opinion was provided in strict confidence, and naturally was covered by the Official Secrets Act.
Anyone who thinks Sir Kim has been "undiplomatic" by conveying his thoughts in private correspondence simply doesn't understand how our diplomatic service works. The key question is who leaked the correspondence, and why. My best guess is that one of Boris' sniveling little ar$e lickers did it, on the basis that chaos works for their proven liar of a leader.
Regrettably, Boris and his bellends have jeopardized the career of one of our finest diplomats for his usual tawdry political gain. The USA is entirely within its rights to demand that Sir Kim is replaced, unfortunately.
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me.. Anyone who thinks Sir Kim has been "undiplomatic" by conveying his thoughts in private correspondence simply doesn't understand how our diplomatic service works. The key question is who leaked the correspondence, and why. My best guess is that one of Boris' sniveling little ar$e lickers did it, on the basis that chaos works for their proven liar of a leader.
Regrettably, Boris and his bellends have jeopardized the career of one of our finest diplomats for his usual tawdry political gain. The USA is entirely within its rights to demand that Sir Kim is replaced, unfortunately.
Vanden Saab said:
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me..
It’s fairly simple, Boris needs to suck up to Trump. This is his way of signalling that he’s willing to sack the Ambassador if it helps.By the way there is no “Special Relationship” except when the Americans need something. To believe otherwise is really naive.
If there is a plus side to any of this it suggests that the Ambassador is quite a good judge of character.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: His job.
People have a simple choice.
Back the ability of our diplomatic service to send honest appraisals of a situation to the Foreign Office without having to fear leaks or hurting the feelings of the US president.
Or put the feelings of Trump and the interests of the US first even in private diplomatic correspondence for fear it might be leaked.
Farage and Bill Cash chose the latter, to an extent so did Boris with his lack of backing last night.
The issue here isn't what Kim Darroch said, it's that ability of our ambassadors to speak candidly has been compromised and we now have a situation where Trump is essentially saying to the UK "I don't like the Prime Minister and I want an ambassador who is nice about me".
I can see the argument that once compromised it's awkward to leave Kim Darroch in place, but have no doubt Woody Johnson and every other ambassador everywhere on the planet will be doing similar things to Kim Darroch.
Personally I'd get the security services involved and use the full powers of the law to find and take action against the leaker.
I don't use the word lightly but I think their actions are against the UK national interest and borderline treasonous.
I am genuinely surprised that people really struggle to see this.
Agree with that. People have a simple choice.
Back the ability of our diplomatic service to send honest appraisals of a situation to the Foreign Office without having to fear leaks or hurting the feelings of the US president.
Or put the feelings of Trump and the interests of the US first even in private diplomatic correspondence for fear it might be leaked.
Farage and Bill Cash chose the latter, to an extent so did Boris with his lack of backing last night.
The issue here isn't what Kim Darroch said, it's that ability of our ambassadors to speak candidly has been compromised and we now have a situation where Trump is essentially saying to the UK "I don't like the Prime Minister and I want an ambassador who is nice about me".
I can see the argument that once compromised it's awkward to leave Kim Darroch in place, but have no doubt Woody Johnson and every other ambassador everywhere on the planet will be doing similar things to Kim Darroch.
Personally I'd get the security services involved and use the full powers of the law to find and take action against the leaker.
I don't use the word lightly but I think their actions are against the UK national interest and borderline treasonous.
I am genuinely surprised that people really struggle to see this.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: His job.
People have a simple choice.
Back the ability of our diplomatic service to send honest appraisals of a situation to the Foreign Office without having to fear leaks or hurting the feelings of the US president.
Or put the feelings of Trump and the interests of the US first even in private diplomatic correspondence for fear it might be leaked.
Farage and Bill Cash chose the latter, to an extent so did Boris with his lack of backing last night.
The issue here isn't what Kim Darroch said, it's that ability of our ambassadors to speak candidly has been compromised and we now have a situation where Trump is essentially saying to the UK "I don't like the Prime Minister and I want an ambassador who is nice about me".
I can see the argument that once compromised it's awkward to leave Kim Darroch in place, but have no doubt Woody Johnson and every other ambassador everywhere on the planet will be doing similar things to Kim Darroch.
Personally I'd get the security services involved and use the full powers of the law to find and take action against the leaker.
I don't use the word lightly but I think their actions are against the UK national interest and borderline treasonous.
I am genuinely surprised that people really struggle to see this.
Writing down your most candid thoughts like this is not clever. Having the opinion is fine. Telling people who really need to know also fine. He's probably right in his opinions. People have a simple choice.
Back the ability of our diplomatic service to send honest appraisals of a situation to the Foreign Office without having to fear leaks or hurting the feelings of the US president.
Or put the feelings of Trump and the interests of the US first even in private diplomatic correspondence for fear it might be leaked.
Farage and Bill Cash chose the latter, to an extent so did Boris with his lack of backing last night.
The issue here isn't what Kim Darroch said, it's that ability of our ambassadors to speak candidly has been compromised and we now have a situation where Trump is essentially saying to the UK "I don't like the Prime Minister and I want an ambassador who is nice about me".
I can see the argument that once compromised it's awkward to leave Kim Darroch in place, but have no doubt Woody Johnson and every other ambassador everywhere on the planet will be doing similar things to Kim Darroch.
Personally I'd get the security services involved and use the full powers of the law to find and take action against the leaker.
I don't use the word lightly but I think their actions are against the UK national interest and borderline treasonous.
I am genuinely surprised that people really struggle to see this.
I agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
Murph7355 said:
Writing down your most candid thoughts like this is not clever. Having the opinion is fine. Telling people who really need to know also fine. He's probably right in his opinions.
I agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
He is paid to write down his most candid thoughts and given a secure means to send them back home to the people it is deemed need to know them.I agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
These are quite literally diplomatic correspondence.
Like I said, once it's leaked I get that it might be difficult to keep Kim Darroch in his job, but saying he "ought to be more circumspect" feels like it's entirely missing the point of what it is that ambassadors are paid to do.
The ambassador is essentially a guest in the USA, and one who has insulted its host, and to keep him on would be incredibly foolish.
If the national interest comes first, he should be replaced immediately. His job is (I think) to foster relations and trade with the USA and through no fault of his own, that is not about to happen now.
The thing I find odd though is that with the spy capabilities of the USA, this information can't exactly be a revelation can it? It's more the public exposure that has caused the damage here. Is it really that naive to believe that all these cables are already being read by the americans, so some discretion in the choice of words would have been warranted regardless?
If the national interest comes first, he should be replaced immediately. His job is (I think) to foster relations and trade with the USA and through no fault of his own, that is not about to happen now.
The thing I find odd though is that with the spy capabilities of the USA, this information can't exactly be a revelation can it? It's more the public exposure that has caused the damage here. Is it really that naive to believe that all these cables are already being read by the americans, so some discretion in the choice of words would have been warranted regardless?
Vanden Saab said:
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me..
It's important to keep an open mind, the account may just as well have been hacked by a foreign agent, so it's far too early to speculate. However, I don't think this leak/hack puts any spanner in any works, quite the opposite as Trump clearly has a poor relationship with Sir Kim. As for special relationship, if that's what you want to believe then so be it.
Whoever leaked it needs to be found and face whatever penalties exist. That much is obvious. I’ll reserve judgement on who did it as I have no idea.
What I do find odd is the language - at least as reported. I often write documents with a similar purpose: to educate some people on the circumstances of an expensive piece of work they have commissioned. You don’t use words and opinion like “inept”, you use facts. I may well think an individual was inept, but I’d illustrate with examples of what they had/had not done, and leave the reader in no doubt that they were inept ... without using the word. At least when it appears of the front page of the FT, I would have an argument about facts rather than emotion.
What I do find odd is the language - at least as reported. I often write documents with a similar purpose: to educate some people on the circumstances of an expensive piece of work they have commissioned. You don’t use words and opinion like “inept”, you use facts. I may well think an individual was inept, but I’d illustrate with examples of what they had/had not done, and leave the reader in no doubt that they were inept ... without using the word. At least when it appears of the front page of the FT, I would have an argument about facts rather than emotion.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: He is paid to write down his most candid thoughts and given a secure means to send them back home to the people it is deemed need to know them.
These are quite literally diplomatic correspondence.
Like I said, once it's leaked I get that it might be difficult to keep Kim Darroch in his job, but saying he "ought to be more circumspect" feels like it's entirely missing the point of what it is that ambassadors are paid to do.
Absolutely true, I wonder how many other diplomats will be pondering the point, if his account can be breached then where could this lead to?These are quite literally diplomatic correspondence.
Like I said, once it's leaked I get that it might be difficult to keep Kim Darroch in his job, but saying he "ought to be more circumspect" feels like it's entirely missing the point of what it is that ambassadors are paid to do.
Countdown said:
Vanden Saab said:
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me..
It’s fairly simple, Boris needs to suck up to Trump. This is his way of signalling that he’s willing to sack the Ambassador if it helps.By the way there is no “Special Relationship” except when the Americans need something. To believe otherwise is really naive.
If there is a plus side to any of this it suggests that the Ambassador is quite a good judge of character.
garyhun said:
What exactly are the ‘secure’ means by which these memos/reports are sent?
Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
According to former ambassador Craig Murray (okay he’s a bit tinfoil hatty at times but seems to know what he’s talking about here) such memos are now sent by encrypted email.Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/ki...
BlackLabel said:
garyhun said:
What exactly are the ‘secure’ means by which these memos/reports are sent?
Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
According to former ambassador Craig Murray (okay he’s a bit tinfoil hatty at times but seems to know what he’s talking about here) such memos are now sent by encrypted email.Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/ki...
So it would appear to be a good old fashioned leak rather than any super spy electronic intercept type thing.
Blue62 said:
Vanden Saab said:
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me..
It's important to keep an open mind, the account may just as well have been hacked by a foreign agent, so it's far too early to speculate. However, I don't think this leak/hack puts any spanner in any works, quite the opposite as Trump clearly has a poor relationship with Sir Kim. As for special relationship, if that's what you want to believe then so be it.
As for poor relationship - have a google as to how many of team trump have been to Sir Kims official receptions, private parties...
Murph7355 said:
Writing down your most candid thoughts like this is not clever. Having the opinion is fine. Telling people who really need to know also fine. He's probably right in his opinions.
I agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
It's sent to a very restricted list - it's not openly available, and because of this it's very candid, including some very detailed personal information, includes rumours and qualifiers, sources etc. It's entirely part of the diplomatic jobI agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
garyhun said:
BlackLabel said:
garyhun said:
What exactly are the ‘secure’ means by which these memos/reports are sent?
Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
According to former ambassador Craig Murray (okay he’s a bit tinfoil hatty at times but seems to know what he’s talking about here) such memos are now sent by encrypted email.Is it possible that the US themselves intercepted and published the information for example?
Genuine question as I have no idea.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/07/ki...
So it would appear to be a good old fashioned leak rather than any super spy electronic intercept type thing.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2004/jul/15/f...
It's probably not surprising that that blog entry of his is all over russian media....
Countdown said:
Vanden Saab said:
While only being an ordinary citizen I am struggling to understand what possible advantage boris would get from this leak. May be you could explain the chaos theory for us common folk. While trying not to make it all about Brexit those in our gov. and civil service who dislike the USA and are more EU centric would have far more to gain from putting a spanner in the special relationship it would seem to me..
It’s fairly simple, Boris needs to suck up to Trump. This is his way of signalling that he’s willing to sack the Ambassador if it helps.By the way there is no “Special Relationship” except when the Americans need something. To believe otherwise is really naive.
If there is a plus side to any of this it suggests that the Ambassador is quite a good judge of character.
Byker28i said:
Murph7355 said:
Writing down your most candid thoughts like this is not clever. Having the opinion is fine. Telling people who really need to know also fine. He's probably right in his opinions.
I agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
It's sent to a very restricted list - it's not openly available, and because of this it's very candid, including some very detailed personal information, includes rumours and qualifiers, sources etc. It's entirely part of the diplomatic jobI agree that whoever leaked it needs to be uncovered... And you wouldn't think it would be that hard to do.
But all sorts of stuff has been leaked over the last few years. Senior people know this happens and probably ought to be more circumspect.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff