A black day for British diplomacy
I find it impossible to disagree with the present Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt that the resignation of Britain's ambassador to the USA, Sir Kim Darroch, was "A black day for British displomacy" or with his predecessor and leadership rival Boris Johnson that whoever is responsible for the leak which made Sir Kim's position untenable deserves to be "eviscerated."
Ambassadors are supposed to be able to provide the governments which appoint them with a frank assessment of the situation in the country to which they are posted. It is an essential part of the job to for British envoys to tell our governments what they really think
As I wrote here yesterday, "If every ambassador who wrote an honest and unflattering opinion of the government to which he was accredited was the target of a similar leak and had to resign there would be no diplomats left in Moscow, Bejing, Ankara, Tehran, or a number of other capitals we can all easily think of."
This is understood even by the more grown-up supporters of President Trump.
Republican Senator Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who is a Trump supporter, said Sir Kim had done "an outstanding job" as ambassador and his resignation was "a chilling moment".
Senator Graham added that
"Ambassadors need to be able to talk to their governments without fear of being compromised."
Sir Kim's position was untenable from the moment his confidential advice to the government became public: he has done the honourable thing by falling on his sword and resigning despite not being at fault, but you do not have to agree with his assessment of the Trump administration to see that his having to go for expressing his opinions is most unfortunate.
Whether the target of whoever leaked the messages was to damage Sir Kim or to damage the relationship between Britain and America, they succeeded.
Ambassadors are supposed to be able to provide the governments which appoint them with a frank assessment of the situation in the country to which they are posted. It is an essential part of the job to for British envoys to tell our governments what they really think
As I wrote here yesterday, "If every ambassador who wrote an honest and unflattering opinion of the government to which he was accredited was the target of a similar leak and had to resign there would be no diplomats left in Moscow, Bejing, Ankara, Tehran, or a number of other capitals we can all easily think of."
This is understood even by the more grown-up supporters of President Trump.
Republican Senator Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who is a Trump supporter, said Sir Kim had done "an outstanding job" as ambassador and his resignation was "a chilling moment".
Senator Graham added that
"Ambassadors need to be able to talk to their governments without fear of being compromised."
Sir Kim's position was untenable from the moment his confidential advice to the government became public: he has done the honourable thing by falling on his sword and resigning despite not being at fault, but you do not have to agree with his assessment of the Trump administration to see that his having to go for expressing his opinions is most unfortunate.
Whether the target of whoever leaked the messages was to damage Sir Kim or to damage the relationship between Britain and America, they succeeded.
Comments