Dear Mhairi Black...

Dear Mhairi Black,

Like millions of others, last week I was enthralled by your maiden speech in the House of Commons. First of all, I wanted to say well done. It really was a fantastic speech, delivered with passion and incisive wit. Had you been standing in my constituency, I'd have voted for you hands down. I reckon anyone on the English left would be lying if they said they wouldn't have done the same.

But, Mhairi Black, there were parts of your speech that troubled me. Your account of the constituent who was forced to choose between travelling for food or travelling to the job centre movd me to tears. But, I am troubled. The picture of Scotland that you painted was of a country that is hurting. A country that is suffering, not just under the burden of austerity, but suffering under a cruel and oppressive government. Given that Scotland stopped backing the Conservatives a generation ago, it is easy to see the rage that is felt by many, that a government they never voted for is forcing austerity upon them. And yet, who else rules north of the border? Who else has at least contributed to the creation of this cold, uncaring land that you so passionately denounce? That would be the Scottish National Party, in power at Holyrood since 2007. Your party.

Now, hold on, you may say to me. Yes, the SNP has governed Scotland for eight years. But it has been subject to austerity from above, first by Labour, then the coalition, and now from the Conservatives. The SNP administration has been forced to do more with less, as the bloc grant from London has been cut. The only solution to this, you might add, is for Scotland to break away from the United Kingdom and go it alone. Released from the Westminster shackles, the SNP would able to throw money at all problems and solve them.

Let's take a step into the distant past. 1997. I was seven, you were three. I doubt either of us took much interest in the Scottish devolution debate that year. Certainly, it doesn't rank alongside the victory of the No More School Party in my primary school elections, which brought Tony Blair to power (I might be mixing two events there...). But there was a referendum in Scotland, and by 75% to 25%, the Scottish people voted to restore a legislative assembly to Edinburgh.

They also voted on another question. To ensure that the new Scottish Parliament would be more than a talking shop, the Labour government granted it the power to vary the rate of income tax in Scotland by 3 pence in the pound. This 'Tartan Tax' was where the opponents of devolution chose to do battle. The Parliament was a foregone conclusion. But tax-raising powers weren't. In the end, it too was passed, by 63% to 37%.

Why the digression into history? That tax-altering power has never been used. Since 1999, when the Parliament first sat and the Scottish Government began work, no extra monies have been raised by Scotland, in Scotland or for Scotland. Were the SNP really the left-wing crusading firebrands they claim to be, they could have raised taxes in Scotland, to help the poorest in society, through tax credits, extra public spending, or even direct subsidies. This is called redistribution, and is the oldest socialist tool. It wouldn't solve all of Scotland's problems. But it would alleviate the suffering of thousands of Scots. Instead, as the bloc grant from Westminster shrinks, the SNP administration has applied austerity. The only political institution with the power to ease the cuts, apart from the mighty Treasury, has chosen not to do so.

I don't know why, Mhairi Black, your party has chosen to follow this course of action. I have a few ideas. It is easier to paint Westminster as the villain. It also helps your cause of separating Scotland from the Union. But what you cannot do is attack Westminster for the state of the nation, when the Scotland you represent is equally of the SNP's making.

You also identified Tony Benn as your all time political hero. I had to watch that bit again, so surprised was I. Tony Benn? A Labour stalwart for so long that he probably knew the Tolpuddle Martyrs? Labour, the party you and the SNP are committed to destroying, both in Scotland and apparently here in England as well?

I can only presume you were drawn to Tony Benn due to the fact that, during the 1980s, his insurgent campaign to make Labour more socialist ignited a civil war in the party that brought it to the brink of collapse. Of course, as a result he was partly responsible for a split in the left vote, which kept the Tories in power for nearly two decades. Is that what you want? Another eighteen years of single party, right wing rule?

In spite of his actions, Benn was Labour to his core. He opposed Scottish independence, on the grounds of class solidarity and familial ties. Do not claim that you are inspired by him, when all the evidence suggests that the SNP is devoted to destroying much of what he stood for.

There is another reason you should be cautious about appropriating the legacy of Tony Benn. Above all else, even above socialism, Tony Benn loved democracy. Specifically, he loved the democratically expressed sovereign will of the British people, as expressed through the men and women that they returned to represent them in the House of Commons. Parliamentary sovereignty was everything to him. This is where his opposition to the EU came from (incidentally, SNP policy is to join the EU so fast no one will notice you left; how does that fit?); not just because he saw the EU as a capitalist cabal, but because Britain's membership deprived the House of Commons of supreme sovereignty. There is a colossal irony in you choosing to identify with a figure who believed passionately in an institution that you and your party have shown nothing but contempt for, and have made clear you think has no place in governing the people of Scotland. I just wonder, how do you square that circle?

But once again, I must congratulate you on your achievements. The youngest MP since God knows when. A maiden speech that showed left-wing fire, eloquence and passion. A fantastic riposte to the idea that all MPs have to have life experience, or that young people don't care about politics.

But do not use your new found prominence to promise a Scottish socialist utopia, if only the shackles of Westminster were thrown off. The SNP is incapable of delivering that, and I suspect it doesn't want to either. Certainly it has not tried to in it's near decade running Scotland. A little more honesty from the SNP would endear it to millions of English people like me.

Yours,

A fellow progressive traveller.

Srebrenica at Twenty

Never again. 

In the aftermath of the Second World War, this was the promise made by the victorious Allies. As Nazi Germany collapsed, and the Allies over-ran vast swathes of Europe, they uncovered the horror of horrors. The Nazi state, and its collaborators, had systematically undertaken an attempt to completely destroy entire groups, purely based on ideology. Jews, Roma, disabled people, Poles, Soviets, communists, religious minorities. For not fitting in with the 'Master Race', their punishment was to die. This was death on an industrial scale.

Never again. As the United Nations was established, a set of universal rights was written in to international law. The perpetrators of the Holocaust were put on trial for crimes against humanity. Some were hanged, others were imprisoned. Justice was seen to have been done. The United Nations would bestride the globe, and ensure that never again would be a reality, and not just hollow words.

And so we reassured ourselves, this would not happen again. Of course, there were acts of genocide after 1945. Cambodia, in the 70s. The Congo in the 60s. Rwanda in the 90s. But these were in faraway places, and so 'didn't count'. Or 'were different.'

And then it happened. Genocide returned to the developed world. In the early 1990s, the country of Yugoslavia was tearing itself apart, as nationalism and religion fuelled a vicious cycle of conflict. The international community was virtually powerless. Certainly, it did little beyond hand-wringing and stern words.

These were not enough. The town of Srebrenica, in Bosnia, was home to thousands of Bosnian Muslims, in an area dominated by Christian Serbs. Before the war, they had been neighbours. Now they were enemies.

On 11th July 1995, the Serbs captured the town. Over the next few days, 8000 men and boys were murdered. What was the worse, the town was supposed to be under UN protection. The UN peacekeepers, outnumbered and outgunned, handed over more people to the Serbs. The peacekeepers were then taken prisoner, and used as human shields by the Serbs, to prevent other UN forces from intervening. No greater failure of the principle of never again can be imagined. The UN was tantamount to complicit in genocide.

Eventually, word got out about the horrors unfolding in Bosnia. Belatedly, the international community responded. The UN asked NATO to protect the Bosnian Muslims. Peace keeping became peace making, as NATO airstrikes forced the Serbs to the negotiating table. Out of this horror came peace, a peace which has lasted.

This event happened within my lifetime. Well within living memory. And yet it has been largely forgotten. It is easy to see why. It was an example of the failure of the post-war dream; that liberal democracy and international institutions would prevent a repeat of mass slaughter. Never again had become never again, until the next time.

But yet this makes it more important to remember. For the appalling events of Srebrenica serve as a reminder that we must never be complacent in our attitudes towards prejudice. My parents went to Yugoslavia in the 1980s, and had you told them they were visiting a country where neighbours would be murdering each other within the decade, they would have laughed you away. Treating people as the Other can lead to bloodshed, now matter how remote that possibility seems at first.

Srebrenica also shows what the international community can achieve. Those responsible are in the process of being tried by an international war crimes court. The Dutch state, which provided the peacekeepers who handed over their charges to be slaughtered, has been found guilty of negligence and has been ordered to pay compensation. Too late, yes. Too slow, yes. But it shows that genocide does not go unpunished.

Since 1995, the Balkans has flourished. The former Yugoslavia is now an incredibly popular holiday destination. The different parts are in the process of joining the EU. The peace which flowed from Srebrenica has lasted. Now, the chances of another outbreak of bloodshed is remote. International bodies and organisations have cemented that peace.

The last lesson of Srebrenica is one I'm reluctant to accept, but accept it I must. The Dayton Accords, the peace deal which ended the war, did not happen because of a sudden outbreak of goodwill. Nor did they happen because the Serbs suddenly saw the error of their ways, or even because the Bosnians had fought them to a standstill. The Dayton Accords were signed because the Serbs were bombed to the conference table by NATO. After the images of Srebrenica were beamed around the world, the international community was forced into action. This dreadful event should never have been allowed to happen. Sometimes only the use of force can prevent even more killing. Had the UN asked for force to be used in 1994, or 1993, or any other year, many of those 8000 men and boys may have lived to see today.

The problem is, another US-led use of force against another country has clouded minds, mine included. As much as it pains me to say, those on the left should accept that Dubya's revenge-fuelled attack on Iraq in 2003 should not mean the end of interventionism. Unilateralism has ruined Iraq, a unilateralism based on a desire to 'finish off Saddam.' Multilateralism under the banner of the UN, a war conducted as the lesser of two evils, did not.

I know this is long, and very rambling. I'm good at long and rambling. And having written this, I'm no clearer in my mind what Srebrenica  means for me today. But please look beyond that.

Remember the men and children of Srebrenica. If we do not, we never shall learn the lessons it has to offer, whatever they may be.