In Praise of... Podcasts

So today is apparently International Podcast Day. Yes, there is now even a day for that it would seem.

But I love podcasts, as anyone who has listened to me for more than 30 seconds may know. As a teacher, they really help me to do my marking; it turns out I can't mark in silence, and get easily bored with radio and music in the car, so these gems have been helping me to get through some of the tedium.

Here is what keeps me going:

FiveThirtyEight Politics

In 2012, I remember using this website to try and stay calm as Obama's re-election looked to be on the rocks. Got last year less wrong than other political analysts. Amazing how something as dry as sample sizes can be made into something really interesting.

BBC Friday Night Comedy

Not always good, not always finished. But often making me absolutely crack up.

In Our Time

Bringing expert views on an overwhelming range of historical, literary and philosophical topics to a wider audience since 1998.

The Documentary

A selection from the BBC World Service's documentaries that week. Can be easy to get bogged down, but some real gems about topics you'd never even considered thinking about.

History Extra

The BBC history magazine's podcast. Interviews with historians are well worth listening to, and goes into far more depth than the magazine seems to.

The History Hour

Using the BBC archives to compile a 'This week in history' feature. Some excellent coverage of events from around the world.

Analysis

Hard thinking about the major problems of the 21st century.

The New Statesman Podcast

It is nice to know that, in a world in which everything I believe is seemingly under siege, that I am not alone.

The National Archives Podcast Series

Fascinating insights into the treasure trove of documents that the UK government has been amassing since the Norman Conquest.

The Folklore Podcast

We may pretend to ourselves that we are modern, sophisticated people with no fears and worries about that which we don't understand. But who are we kidding? Everyone is fascinated, and not to mention slightly afraid, of the things that exist on the edge of our explanation, and that go bump in the night.

Pod Save America

Four people who used to work for the Obama administration rip into the Trump presidency twice a week. It is as funny as you'd expect.

Slate's Whistlestop

Although only on number 45, the American presidency has already seen many ups, downs, highlights and lowlights. American political journalist John Dickerson is an expert guide through the years, and shows that Trump is only different in tone and style to those who have gone before him.

Diane: Entering the town of Twin Peaks

I've been watching Twin Peaks for a couple of months now, and it is really nice to have some people flesh out what on Earth they think I've just watched!

Diane...

Brexitcast

Over the next 18 months, the UK is going to attempt a geopolitical challenge that will dwarf anything we have done before, and likely anything we ever try again. Am mighty glad someone is around to explain it.

Britain is (partly) to blame for North Korea's nuclear threats.

I'm going to say something controversial here.

The UK has helped to make the current spat with North Korea happen.

Now, on the surface, this seems daft. While Britain is certainly 'on South Korea's side,' having fought under the UN banner in the Korean War to defend it from North Korea's invasion, we also have diplomatic relations with North Korea, which not all countries do. However, these relations do not amount to very much. We have no military forces in the region, and although we regularly join in the condemnation of the North's nuclear programme, there isn't much Britain actually does to counter it.

So how is this our problem?

We need to travel back to a very different time to understand how this is our fault. Well, to 2003 at any rate.

The world was still stunned by the devastating terrorist attacks that had rocked the United States in September 2001. As I've written before, the international reservoir of goodwill that America had accumulated was enormous. It had enabled the USA, alongside other countries, to topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan; the Taliban had provided support and cover for Al-Quaeda. The Americans had narrowly failed to capture Al-Quaeda's leader, Osama Bin Laden. But no matter, the Taliban was down and a fledgling Afghan democracy was supposed to be under construction. No one could begrudge the Americans that operation.

But yet the USA was on the brink of squandering the goodwill. As 2003 dawned, it was hurtling into a confrontation with Iraq. Since the Gulf War of 1991, Iraq under Saddam Hussein had been an international pariah. Sanctions had reduced the country to poverty, the Americans and British regularly pounded Iraqi installations with air strikes, large chunks of the country were under US and British no-fly zones. As part of this international pressure, Iraq had been forced to open up its military facilities to international inspection. During the 1980s, and the long war with Iran, Iraq had developed a host of chemical and biological weapons. Had the Israelis not attacked the Osirak nuclear reactor, there is a good chance that Saddam would have had nuclear weapons too. During the Gulf War, there was a tremendous fear of this arsenal. But by the late 1990s, it was widely assumed that, despite Iraq's efforts to block inspections, their arsenal of weapons of mass destruction had been eliminated.

And then September 11th happened. The Bush administration considered Saddam Hussein to be unfinished business; the younger George Bush would finish off what the elder George Bush had not. Suddenly, there was a drumbeat to war, as some Western intelligence agencies worked hard to prove that Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programme was continuing in the shadows. Many who did not believe accused the Americans of using the weapons as cover to settle old scores. Fear of outside attack being exploited to provide cover for an extension of democracy and oil grabbing. In the absence of hard proof, it became a matter of belief.

The USA was unable to convince the United Nations that Iraq posed a clear and present danger to the global order. So instead, a 'coalition of the willing' was created, splitting the international community. Britain agreed to support the United States, in the midst of huge controversy. In March 2003, the coalition went ahead and attacked Iraq, with the pretext being that they had clear authority from previous UN resolutions to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction.

We all know what happened next. The weapons were never found. Iraq had indeed surrendered nearly all of its weapons of mass destruction during the 1990s. A tiny amount remained, but it was useless. The fact Saddam hadn't used the weapons when confronted with the overwhelming might of American military power was probably a bit of a clue. Saddam was later to be hanged, and his country slid into sectarian carnage.

But the world was watching. The message was clear. Even if you engaged with the United Nations, and went along with the idea of disarmament, it was not enough to save you. The message was rammed home painfully in 2011, when Colonel Gaddafi was toppled in Libya, by most of the same countries that had destroyed Iraq. In 2003, Gaddafi had given up his nuclear weapons programme in the 2000s, in return for being brought in from the cold. It didn't do him any good, and his fate was to be shot and killed in a gutter as his regime crumbled under NATO airstrikes.

North Korea has been watching. In the 1990s, there were moves by North Korea to engage with the rest of the world, partially motivated by a crippling famine and the end of Soviet aid after the end of the Cold War. But since the early 2000s, this avenue has been closed. In 2006 they tested their first nuclear weapon, and the rest has brought us to today.

Had we refused to support US action against Iraq in 2003, I'm sure the Bush administration would not have changed its mind, it would have still attacked Iraq anyway. North Korea may still have decided it's future security lay in pursuing the nuclear route. But by lending our support to the Americans, and showing the dangers of being a disarmed country, Britain helped to persuade North Korea to arm itself.

The Iraq War is continuing to have impacts that we cannot understand, and certainly couldn't imagine.

Anti-war protesters in London, 2003.