The UK appoints a failed PM as its new foreign secretary

Within hours of being appointed as the new British Foreign Secretary, former Prime Minister David Cameron arrived in Kiev.

Cameron had already decorated his profile pictures on LinkedIn and To come and spin on Santa Cameron’s knee with his wish list just in time for Christmas. Zelensky wasted no time either.

As the two enjoyed their first date, Cameron repeated platitudes from the Western conversation playbook, saying Britain would give Zelensky ““The military support you need, not only this year and next year, but as much as it takes.”

It certainly did not take long for Cameron to become aware of the full Western agenda regarding Ukraine, as he was arguably one of its early pioneers. I believe that the process began under my presidency by sending more troops to the frontline countries in NATO; “To Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, let’s turn some of them into permanent bases.” In 2022, Cameron said, proudly calling for the permanence of the kind of anti-Russian encroachment by NATO that has contributed to the current conflict. In 2015, he had already sent British troops to train Ukrainians harassing Russian speakers in Donbas — the same year the UK’s Canadian allies were warned of neo-Nazis within Ukrainian ranks, as the Ottawa Citizen reported. Cameron was an early supporter of anti-Russian cancel culture, having led the campaign to expel Moscow from the G8 in 2014.

Fortunately, Cameron has fallen off the political radar since leaving office in 2016. As head of Alzheimer’s Research UK, he has been busy devoting himself to the noble cause of combating people’s inability to remember during his tenure.

But current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak remains in an empty chair on board the Titanic after he threw Home Secretary Suella Braverman overboard for saying asylum seekers were hoping to increase their chances by pretending to be gay. This was shortly before the pro-Palestinian protests were described as “March of Hate.” Sunak changed the current Foreign Secretary to Braverman’s chair, but then needed to find someone else among the country’s 67 million citizens to fill the job of Britain’s face to the world.

So he threw it into the dustbin of modern UK political history and decided to recycle David Cameron. It’s worth noting how Cameron ended up in that basket in the first place. In a rare moment of clarity, he put himself there.

He is clearly confident that the whole idea of ​​Brexit will receive marginal support Tell The Brit, who would have served Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Islamic State if they dared to go there in a referendum on the subject, ended up betting his career. And he loses. Exits itself from the post-Brexit purge.

Who needs the specter of Russia or any other foreign adversary to divide Britain when Cameron himself was able to single-handedly create shockwaves throughout British society causing fights between family members over a Sunday roast, between colleagues at the water cooler, and between work colleagues. Down the local pub? Regardless of where one stands on the Brexit issue, you have to admit that it is an amazing achievement for any leader to provoke such unrest that ultimately led to regime change himself.

It’s not as if Cameron didn’t have plenty of prior practice with regime change. He insisted on riding the gun alongside French President Nicolas Sarkozy in changing the regime with former Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi. In another feat of self-possession, the commission chaired by Cameron himself, on “State Fragility, Growth and Development,” found that Cameron and Sarkozy had made the wrong decision. “The strategic variables embodied in Iraq have been implemented time and again. Colonel Gaddafi in Libya, President Mubarak in Egypt, President Mobutu in Zaire, the oppressive rule of South Sudan and the Taliban in Afghanistan: the overthrow of all these regimes was followed by an ‘emergent democracy.’ However, no None of these societies become duly thriving democracies. Instead, each disintegrates into various degrees of chaos. I finished.

Former US President Barack Obama boasted at the time that Washington was able to achieve its strategic goals in Libya without sending American forces to the ground. Well, because technically the US has outsourced most of this fiasco to Cameron, and to Sarkozy, who now faces a trial expected in 2025 over allegations that he… He took money from Gaddafi To finance his 2007 election campaign.

So, although Sarkozy may or may not have had an interest in ending things, what excuse did Cameron offer? It’s not like he was even able to accept a pat on the head from Obama for his efforts, as the former Oval Office occupant reportedly turned around and spoke privately He blamed Cameron Because Libya has become “s**tshow.” As a result of this chaos, Britain now faces the problem of the influx of African migrants and the controversy surrounding their floating on a barge off the coast of the United Kingdom. Gaddafi himself to caution France 24 TV reported before the invasion that France and Italy would be flooded with migrants. Obviously, the UK was too. And Cameron has to thank.

But since Cameron apparently felt he was so successful, he decided to help turn Syria upside down as well. Initially, in 2013, he was unable to get enough support in the British Parliament to launch a direct attack on President Bashar al-Assad, but that did not stop him getting enough change from the wallets of UK taxpayers, even at a time of government austerity. To help fund Western-backed Syrian rebels to do the dirty work of trying to change the Assad regime more covertly. Cameron also tried to intimidate Obama and other Western leaders into becoming more aggressive with Assad.

All this sounds like the kind of track record and balanced competence that Britain now needs in its foreign affairs.

The only thing missing now is former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s “success” in the Iraq War. And what do you know… Blair also recently said he stands ready and is ready to help with the humanitarian situation in Gaza, according to the UN special envoy. Financial Times. This all sounds like a dream team for world peace. It’s unfortunate that all other options, such as assigning the following five men hailing from a random bus station in London, have seemingly been ruled out.