THE decision by the UK Government to continue to send arms to Saudi Arabia to continue their slaughter in Yemen isn’t a surprise.
The nature of this war is indisputably defined by the character of its combatants. Backed by the UK and the US, the two most powerful and aggressive imperialist countries in the world, is a coalition of reactionary tyrants and royal parasites consisting of the monarchical dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states together with the savagely repressive regime headed by General al-Sisi in Egypt.
Their target is Yemen, the poorest country of the Middle East. The Saudi monarchy has received a blank check from Britain to wage war in Yemen.
Given the brazen and murderous character of the crimes being committed in Yemen, the response –or, more precisely, the non-response – from official political and media circles in the West is striking. Mass civilian casualties and unspeakable suffering are treated as, at most, an embarrassing public relations problem in the UK imperialist drive to dominate the Middle East and its vast energy resources.
There is no limit to the hypocrisy and cynicism of the media. The British press raises a hue and cry over Russia’s reported dispatch of military equipment and some 200 troops to Syria because it disrupts Washington’s drive to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who is allied with Russia and Iran, and install a more pliant puppet regime. The Russian intervention pales in comparison to the billions spent by Nato allies in the region on arms and other forms of support for right-wing Islamist militias, including those linked to al Qaeda, that are battling the Assad regime.
But the UK media has virtually nothing to say about mass murder being committed by UK allies, directly aided by Westminster, in Yemen. Over the last decade and a half, under the pretext of fighting terrorism and defending human rights, US\UK imperialism has devastated one country after another in the Middle East and North Africa. More than a million people have been killed, while tens of millions more have been made refugees, desperately seeking safety outside their home countries, most recently flooding into Europe.
The “war on terror,” “human rights,” “democracy” and even “regional stability” are all equally fraudulent pretexts for naked aggression aimed at solidifying UK\US hegemony over the Middle East and its vast energy resources.
Alan Hinnrichs
Dundee
AS The National’s letters pages are generally the liveliest of the genre this side of the Rockies, I can only assume that Keith Howell’s views from the dark side are inflicted on us to dampen any overly optimistic positivity regarding Scottish political progress.
His latest communique on the fiscal framework deal (National Conversation, The National, February 25) was a typical example of Unionism’s arrogant impatience with Scots who have the effrontery to question Westminster diktats.
John Swinney’s team was criticised for daring to examine the small print on every proposal emanating from Westminster/The Treasury but I believe they should be congratulated, having apparently learnt from history. Hopefully, the days when Scots doffed the cap and meekly accepted crumbs from Westminster’s table are over.
Regarding Howell’s concern over what the Holyrood parties will do with the “powers”, I would suggest that as the powers are strictly limited any progress will be ditto.
However, lest I am accused of Howell-esque negativity, I do acknowledge that Westminster has granted us absolute power over the issue of people parking on pavements.
Malcolm Cordell
Dundee
ALLY of Glasgow (National Conversation, The National, February 25) is right to criticise the RSPB for their attempt to stop wind farms off our east coast. If the RSPB want to take responsibility for the nation’s energy policy then they should form a political party and stand for election.
They should also bear in mind that huge numbers of birds suffer premature death every week. This is because we deliberately kill them because we want to eat them. The carnage includes chickens, hens, ducks, geese, turkeys, pheasants, partridges and grouse. Why does the RSPB not complain about this?
Alan Lawson
Dundee
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here