Michael Portillo
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
Another August, another unforeseen international crisis. Certainly Britain was caught napping. As the seriousness of Russia’s subjugation of Georgia became apparent, President Sarkozy zoomed around the capitals and brought about a ceasefire. While the United States was powerless to prevent the humiliation of its ally, President Bush issued threats against Moscow, Condoleezza Rice headed for Tbilisi and America poured aid into the devastated areas. Britain was invisible.
David Miliband, the foreign secretary, once remarked, when Tony Blair was still prime minister, that we would miss him once he had been replaced by Gordon Brown. Well, I certainly do. If Blair were still in office the United Kingdom would have been more evident and effective during this crisis. Somehow he would have ignored the fact that France holds the presidency of the European Union and would have discovered a role for himself and his country.
Blair’s detractors will say that was precisely his problem. He could not resist embroiling us in foreign policy adventures, cutting a dash way beyond what Britain merited or could sustain. For the majority in his own party, Iraq was the ultimate demonstration of Blair’s hubris and it brought him down.
That hostile analysis of Blair leaves out important points. The Iraq war was disastrous during his premiership, but it did not stop him winning the 2005 election with a good majority. The war became unpopular, but Blair’s conduct of it left us in no doubt that he was a leader. He knew what he wanted and stuck to it courageously. Like Margaret Thatcher before him, he made it impossible for any opposition leader to compete. More speculatively, I believe that most voters liked to think that Britain was a significant force in the world, even if we paid a price for playing such a conspicuous part.
Brown looks indecisive. He has been tossed about in the economic storm and seems to steer no clear course. If he made more of foreign policy he might appear more resolute even if his domestic policy continues to slither about. With Iraq, Blair established a reputation for leadership that could not be shaken even when he made U-turns at home.
To the frustration of those in the Labour party who put their hopes in Brown, his domestic policy - whether in the reform of public services or the reduction of civil liberties - looks Blairite. The big change, in response to his party, has come in foreign policy. It is not just that he has kept his distance from Bush. Britain has fallen generally silent and our role in Iraq has been minimised.
Only recently has it become clear that in the battle for Basra earlier this year British troops remained aloof while Iraqi and American forces overwhelmed the Mahdi Army, followers of the cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Apparently Britain had done a deal with the Shi’ite group. According to some reports, senior US officers and the Iraqi government have now lost faith in British forces.
It is highly unlikely that Blair would have allowed such a situation to arise. His guiding principle was that Washington should know always that it could count on its British allies. It is an unfortunate epitaph on British involvement in Iraq - given how many soldiers have been killed or terribly wounded - that we began well and ended badly, while the Americans started badly and are finishing well.
Bush now begins to look more competent than before as a foreign policy performer. He fired Donald Rumsfeld, his defence secretary, and installed General David Petraeus as commander in Iraq. In late 2006 he weathered almost universal criticism by rejecting the report from James Baker, the former secretary of state, and the Iraq Study Group, which called for scaling down American troop numbers. Instead, he ordered a “surge”.
Today much of Iraq is calm, Al-Qaeda’s effectiveness there has dwindled and the United States has a credible plan for orderly withdrawal. Sadly, Britain has played little part in the allies’ reversal of fortune.
Overall, Brown has presided over an incredible shrinking foreign policy. His decision to avoid the opening festivities of the Beijing Olympics but to appear at the closing ceremony always looked like a pathetic compromise.
Again, Bush has shown him up. He is the first US president to visit an Olympics overseas. But he took the opportunity to criticise China strongly before arriving, attacking Beijing for denying religious freedom, a choice of topic which shows that he still understands the electorate back home, too. By contrast, Brown looks merely weak, afraid to attend but too anxious to stay away and with nothing to say about human rights.
Of course the issue with Brown is, as ever, one of personality. Blair liked foreign policy because he loved the glamour of shuttle diplomacy. He believed in his powers of persuasion. He enjoyed the company and the challenge of other world leaders. Bush and Sarkozy have the taste for it, too, and it is extraordinary how much personal relations still matter in the world of top-level diplomacy. Brown lacks the temperament. Over many years he has largely shunned the company of foreign counterparts. For example, he was always impatient to escape from meetings of finance ministers in Brussels.
Still, his government clearly understands that it must sound tough against Russia over Georgia. It is an enduring part of the Thatcher legacy that there are few votes in appeasing Moscow. Miliband hastened back from holiday to make suitably fierce noises. You do not need to be a cynic to appreciate how it might suit the foreign secretary to be visible during August, given that there could be a revolt against Brown’s leadership in the coming weeks. More than that, Miliband’s performance reminded us of days gone by when foreign policy was served up to the British public with oodles of charisma. He helped us to remember what we are missing.
David Cameron also understands that votes might be had by attacking Russia – and Brown’s ineffectiveness, too. He blamed Nato for failing to expedite Georgia’s application for membership of the alliance, arguing that this had “encouraged Russia to believe it could intimidate and bully because the West was divided and uncertain”.
The analysis seems faulty. The Americans have grown excited about Georgia because President Saakashvili is charismatic, US-educated and English-speaking. But while the fall of the iron curtain has altered the world’s political geography, it has not abolished it. In just a few years, and while the allies have been exhausting themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan, we have extended our front line from the border between east and west Germany to the far boundaries of Hungary, Poland and the old Czechoslovakia. Would we really want to extend it to Georgia’s frontier with Russia, even if Georgia had a president less prone than this one to catastrophic misjudgments in handling his neighbour?
Cameron now advocates that we press on to include Georgia in our defence alliance, hoping that this would deter further Russian aggression. Two other consequences are at least as likely. One, that we would be bound to go to war for Georgia if hostilities resumed, or two, that sanity would prevail and we would refuse to do so. In that case we would destroy the credibility of Nato’s article 5 guarantee, which requires each ally to regard an attack on any member as though it were an attack on itself.
It was brave of Britain to guarantee Belgium in 1914 and Poland in 1939 and in both cases to wage war for years without counting the cost, but it scarcely seems opportune to overreach ourselves just now and pledge to defend at any price the land of Stalin’s birth. What size of allied army would make such a commitment credible? A war in Iraq was a “hard sell” for Blair. Cameron might find it even harder to make a convincing case for battling Russia in defence of Georgia.
Is it too much to hope that Britain can again find a role in foreign affairs of the scale achieved by Thatcher and Blair? It would need to be a middle ground between Brown, who has withdrawn from the world stage, and Cameron, who would regard an attack on Tbilisi as equivalent to Russians storming London.
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
u guys don't just get it. the world order has changed and the british influence had been massively eroded. Britain doesnt call the shots any longer. America does and infact britain most often than not acts as a puppet of Big Sam. Whreas the british ppl may not be weak per se,the govt is, by default
ebo mills-brown, accra, ghana
The Labour party has desperately tried to create a weak
effeminate Britain in the image of Europe, they have failed the
British people are not weak, look at our olympic team, look at
the bravery of our army when allowed to fight. Labour has
failed, one day Britain will leave EU and be stronger.
Roderick, Somerset, Great Britain
I know the Liberals hate it, but the current wars have fine tuned
the American & British armies into very able fighting machines,
The British are a vigorous people with a strong economy
thanks to Thatcher, strong military, strong youth look at the
olympics, they need to leave the EU and be free.
Dwight, New York & Southampton, USA & UK
We talk down our country too much, yet even under
a Labour government Britain is the sixth largest manufactoring
nation on the planet, the strongest military power in Western
Europe, the best special forces in the world, a lovely country
everyone wants to come to, a great olympic team, GB is OK.
Henry, Exeter, UK
When Mr Portillio crossed the road from Conservative to a
Liberal-Conservative he like all Liberals lost confidence in Britain and our future, this is why we joined the EU. But we
show in our economy, military, olympic team, way of life and
beautiful country, no need to fear the future.
Frankie, Yarmouth, England
Your country needs a President. Prime Ministers are largely forgotten if they don't engage the globe. Blair & Thatcher did. But Brown & Cameron are hardly intn'l leaders. Think about a President, guys.
Luke, New York City, USA
The UK and the US brought the Soviet Empire to its knees. Together we can do anything, if only we can ignore those have long tried to dictate what we cannot do.
I say thank god for Britain.
But how I long for another Churchill to arouse Britain from her dark slumber of indecision and doubt
John K, Philadelphia & Bangalore, USA & India
I thought Michael Potillo had left politics???
He keeps on popping up
graham, Swansea, UK
The UK always fought above its weight on the modern world stage, helped by players like Mrs. Thatcher and Tony Blair, who knew their roles. The vacuum left by a UK PM with stage fright, has been filled by bolder French and German leaders, leaving the UK in the wings. Take back the spotlight.
J. Hartman, Sao Tome, Sao Tome and Principe
'Virtue - all virtue - is knowledge' - Socrates and 'For also knowledge itself is power' - Francis Bacon. Given the smartness of some of the kids coming out of school and currently going through some of the Universities, dedication to education may give us all we need to punch above our weight.
Al, Glasgow, U.K.
Given the trends of the last dozen or so years, one can only conclude that the Socialists' agenda is to tear Britain apart socially, militarily, politically, economically, culturally and spiritually...and to grind the remains into the ground. Look at the past...think of the future!
GARTH STRONG, Houston, USA
"If we always do, what we always did, we will always get what we always got!"
If Bush has turned the other cheek and not hit Iraq ~ the world would be a better place.
Irony is ~ Saddam died because he did not have WMD, if he had he could have handed them over and lived!
Anne Kent, Dorset,
In this era of non nuclear proliferation, the Russians are showing their true colors. Hoq can we be sio naive as to not expect that the ambitious Russian genes would not inevitably express themseves? Threaten Poland witha nuclear attack. How dare they?? Perhaps it is time time to call their bluff.
Dan, NYC, USA
I think UK foreign policy should shrink until we rediscover our principles and start to abide by them.
Andy, London,
The reality is, the socialists have stripped UK defences bare, the UK couldn't defend herself if the Netherlands and Iceland decided to invade it and take it over.
Harry Jenkins, London,
Like the other utilities, the Foreign Office should be sold off to a foreign buyer.
m cater, london, uk
I hope so, we've been the No. 1 U.S Poodle for long enough it's time we stopped groveling to Neo Cons.
joe reilly, spalding, England
I hope so, we've been the No. 1 U.S Poodle for long enough it's time we stopped groveling to Neo Cons.
joe reilly, spalding, England
Good I hope Britain does become "invisible" on the world stage. I sick of us trying to act as a global policeman.
Martin, Cambridge, UK
Britain will be better off sweeping aside those peripheral foreign policy issues; peripheral means those issues that do not reap financial benefit.
So Tony Blair was right by sacrificing lives in pursuit of oil.
Gordon Brown was correct by doing nothing whilst Georgia was seized.
Neville Anderson, London, UK
So Michael Portillo is upset the UK is losing it's world influence. How odd that it is politicians the world over posturing and preening themselves that bring nations to war.The politicians do not die of course, they normally send their fellow countrymen (and women) to fight and die for the cause.
LB, BRACKNELL, UK
The glory days of Empire are never far away are they Mr Portillo?
Thatcher was part a grand coalition against an ideology - communism. Blair was part of a grand.....well let's not go there. Empire is finished - we are a small nation that should work with the EU for effective foreign policy.
Mark, London, UK
Britain's ability to influence international events is driven by foreign perceptions of her power to do so. What other nations see now is a mix of indecisive governance, declining military power, a population interested only in internal affairs, and continuing decline in will to confront threats.
Dennis Eagan, Colorado Springs, US
The loss of credibility Britain faces now are to a great extent Tony Blair's creation by lying about Iraqi WMD's in his famous dossier. Britain should now concentrate singularly on domestic issues such as rising unemployment and mortgage crisis and leave tangential international issues alone.
Dr Alok Bhattacharyya, London, UK
NATO is moribund already due to fatal overexpansion beyond its reason for existence. It is now dying in Afghanistan. Russia, like it or not, will defend what it sees as its sphere of national interests. Just like the Monroe Doctrine of the US in the Americas. Turn about is fair play.
tarquinis, Seattle, USA
one could saythat Tony Blair was responsible for Giorgia's woesby creating the rprecedent of NATO's invasion of Yugoslavia
peter c, devizes, wessex
Britain is a member of the EU. It follows that the EU should be carrying the "torch of democracy", not Britain alone. Our role in the battle of ideologies should diminish. Where we should be putting in the foreign policy effort is to protect our own self-interest in a global economy.
Dwight Vandryver, Scholar Green, Cheshire, UK
I would have a highly educated workforce, energy stability from sustainable sources, and heavy investment in R+D before mounting my high horse. Our future lies in this. We shouldn't chase a world position, if we work hard and are worthy of it, then it will come.
Charlie Peters, Bristol, UK
Don't confuse Brown with Britain, Brown is a loser, Britain is
not, with nine combat ready Brigades we have more military
power than the rest of Western-Europe combined, America
at the end of the day is interested in hard power which Britain
has, not effeminate-pacifist Europeans.
Frederick, Hampshire, UK
The Brown regime has decoupled British foreign policy from American foriegn policy. In addition to this, there is little doubt that Mr Brown's lame duck status has reduced the British position in the world.
As for Miliband, the less said the better.
Costas, Cyprus,
What does make the position strong? Independence based on democracy. Is UK independent? It, for a long time, is a joke.
Tim, Bonn,
The USSR has control over Europe's gas supplies and has claims on the last of the great untapped oil fields. We are totally compromised. In these uncertain times the UK should look to its own shores by making population control and energy and food security its number one priorities.
Callie Gauntlett, Milverton, UK
Michael,
We all know foreign policy is now directed by the EUSSR. It does make it easier for Brown, however, who has nothing to say of intelligen or use on anything, to keep his mouth "legitimately" shut.
Mind you, it was good to hear Miliband speaking so firmly; bet the Russians are terrified
Jeremy Poynton, Frome, England
I cannot think of anything better than that we should keep our traps firmly shut on this issue.
We should however now realise now that Russia is going to be a bloody nuisance for the foreseeable future and that three frigates, four Typhoons and an army of three divisions is not good enough.
David, Dubai & PL2, UAE & England
The only benefit from us forever poking our snout into other people's business around the world is to politicians' egos.
John Ledbury, Kings Lynn, England
Everyone seems to forget that the UK still has some of the biggest banks, aeroplane engine companies, oil companies and last year was the largest exporter of weapons. If thats not influence I don't what is. Also has thermo nucluler weapons for what it matters.
Caleb Wade, Melbourne, Australia
Britain would be better off doing a "Sweden" and stop getting involved in foreign troubles. Although we should rebuild our armed forces and remain militarliy strong as a deterent.
Martin Hazelgrove, Bridgwater, UK
Why should we want a role in the world? Our under equiped armed forces should be there to protect our interests, not to interfere in other countries or support some spurious American "coalition". Global reach and is vanity.
Tom, Holmfirth, UK
Sir, your country lost its world role after WWII, some would say even after WWI.
Hatsumi, Tokyo, Japan
"Is it too much to hope that Britain can again find a role in foreign affairs of the scale achieved by Thatcher and Blair?"
In all sincerity, I hope so.
Chris, Leeds,
The only thing that pathetic excuse for a prime minister thinks about is how long he'll have to wait before he gets the chop. The only thing his ministers think about is how to position themselves to benefit.
It's no wonder they're doing nothing about foreign (or domestic) policy.
Ian, London, UK
So we were caught napping again,over Georgia that is .
Could someone remind me once again how many billions the tax payer is billed for security. or will "lessons be learnt"
Eddy, Bury St.Edmunds,
Michael Portillo's piece tells you all there is to know about politicians - at least British ones - vainglorious with no sense of reality.
Eddie Reader, birmingham, england
Until we need not use Russia as an energy supplier we are in no position to influence anything. It is time we recognised that we have coal as our resource of energy so we should use it until the CO2 lobby have total 100% incontrovertible proof of their case not a minority viewpoint judgement .
D Cage, Highworth, UK
With regard to forward thinking, does the government, think at all. I suggest not.
Dave, Chorley,
What on earth did you politicans expect ?
You gave everything to Europe and in particular the "vain glorious" French and the "angst ridden" Germns.
Warn the Russians about the "carbon foot print" they have left behind in Georgia that should do the trick.
Peter Bolt, Reddich, UK
Is the real issue not the EU? Its greed, ignorance & arrogance, typified by Sarkozy & Merkyl has been exemplified in its over zealous and unreasonable expansion, which is leading us down an Orwellian path aka "1984". The Eastern Bloc has been replaced with the EU - Russia probably feels threatened.
Paul C, Harlow, England
Does it matter?
Why should Britain have a major influence in world affairs? With our history in imperialism and exploitation of other countries to tell others what to do?
chris, st awful,
I'd rather we persued a policy of splendid isolation. Getting entangled in the affairs of Europe in the early 20th century gave us nothing but fields of dead, empty coffers and years of debt to the USA
John Tomlinson, Brentwood, UK
Britain is cracking at the seems ,The English have no identity without Britain ,The Scots are Heading for independence.Its confusing for folks here never mind abroad!
Eric Reynolds, Glasgow, Scotland
I love you British,worrying about if you're still relevant on the world stage.With all sincerity,if push comes to shove,I still want the Lion fighting on our side.You folks are tenacious,resourceful,and yes respected.That's why the Russians keep screwing with you,because they know you're dangerous.
Ian, Austin TX, USA
Hmm, maybe Mr Portillo would rather that Gordon Brown took us into a war fuelled by lying to the general public, such as the war in Iraq. One should remember that Mrs Thatcher's legacy is greed and poverty. She created an estate agent mentality "Grab as much as you can, as quickly as you can"
Marc, Paris, France
Just what is Brown good for? He's certainly not PM material. As for Boy-Moribund, I doubt Putin wld give a second thought to anything he had to say. We need a Statesman for Foreign Sec, not a pretty-boy kid who's never done a real job in his life. Election needed; take back foreign policy from EUSSR
Donna Walker, Effingham, England
Brown appears to have got this right (for a change)
Keep our nose out of other peoples affairs.
Britain is no longer a world power, we should take out place as a small island in the North Atlantic and mind our own
You don't see Iceland telling Russia what to do?
billy, Cardiff, Wales
There seems to be a lot of support for Michael's view but isn't it about time Britain didn't rush to squander taxpayers' money on yet another piece of international posturing? Brown doesn't get much right but he did with this - let the FCO deal with it (thats what we have a Foreign Secretary for).
TH, Tewkesbury, Glos
Portillo has finally lost it. He misses Blair, who took us into a war we had no part in through lying over the reason. Who knows what he would have said about Russia? Our time for high profile foreign policy was the 19th century. We are second division now. Where has this man been?
John Bull, Wolverhampton,
I agree entirely with Michail Portilo's analysis of the Blair phenomenon and the prominence of Britain in his days....he will be remembered as one of the best PMs that Britain has had after the War.
Has Mr Portillo ever considered joining the Blairite faction ...who knows he could be PM by now!
Joe Bonello, Bournemouth, UK
With their record on the home front, I dont think its in anyones interests to have Brown and his crew start to become involved in this situation. Lets try and sort out the mess we are in here first.
martin, Spain,
we are a small insignificant country now aligned inextrixcably with a number of other similar countries all having insignificant leaders.
All decisions are done by horse trading, something that does not work so well in time of conflict.
France and Germany will still act in joint interests.
mike cassidy, gloucester, engalnd
There was so much foreign policy posturing under Thatcher and Blair that it led to the UK's involvement in the Iraq disaster. Does Mr. Portillo really want more of the same? We should act through the EU and all our efforts in foreign policy should be directed to this end.
Martin Shaw, Cadiz, Spain
I'm more interested about what a British government does in Britian, than what it does abroad.
As for Georgia, I think to involve ourselves in that, 'can of worms' would be sheer madness.
Lesson one, 'Don't poke a bear wit h a stick, your likely to get you hand bitten off'
david, exeter, uk
British cannot defend themselves from their own political follies at home,CCTV, DNA, Government intrusion, out of control immigration,taxes, Social decay. Few I meet even talk of Britain except in sadness. Charity begins at home. What is Britain Any more? A Security council vote & US Base/state.
Alexander, Victoria, Seychelles
British position in global politics depends primarily which camp it sits in. Whereas having US on its side, even as a puppeteer, has its uses, it would require an outright change of heart to obtain a more prominent role. Britain should decide on where does its interest lie, then move forward.
Michael, Limassol, Cyprus
Why doesn't he mention how important Georgia is? Russia has its boot on important oil pipelines now and they have you by the short and curlies. Failure to mention that shows a powerful lot of ignorance. Cameron is pretty stupid in a lot of ways but he is right to think its a big deal.
Christopher H, Canberra, Australia
With the Boy Millipede at the FO, no womder we were caught napping. Roll on the next election when we can sweep this Nu Labour bunch of half-wits out. They are not even half way competent politicians or diplomats, far less great statesmen like Churchill.
Steve, London, UK
i dont really care how hard a sell defending geogia and ukraine is. the point is that by standing up to russia we can prevent ww3, if we appease them they keep going and going building up their forces untill they reach a current nato country maybe in the baltics and then we will be commited anyway.
will, grimsby, uk
What is seriouly at fault in the government is the contingency planning. In particular military equipment, enormous immigrant increase, especially when there are immigrants issuing passports to immigrants. Also new prisons, who in the goverment has thought 10 years ahead, or 30 years.
m wilson, bidache, france
ANNOUNCER: There is a bear in the woods. For some people the bear is easy to see. Others don't see it at all. Some people say the bear is tame. Others say it's vicious and dangerous. Since no one can really be sure who's right, isn't it smart to be as strong as the bear? If there is a bear? (1984)
Dan Schwartz, Sayreville, New Jersey, US of A
Does Cameron really undrestand foreign policy,does he consult before rushing to the press.GEORGIA IS Russian baby to include her in NATO. A world war can be started by reckless leaders like the current one in Georgia,sorry ,even Cameron with his excitement in blindly embracing Georgia
kamalunga, hatfield, uk
Labour doesn't work. Maybe because Gordon Brown's salary is taxed too much.
Fred, Mesa, AZ, USA
Let GB fix things at home first then worry about other people's problems. Trouble is there is no sigh he can fix education and healthcare etc
Jack Tar, Shanghai,
Brown just issues statements which no one is listening to- he is just a complete no entity.
What we should be doing is supporting Georgia and preparing to provide her with immediate relief for the population and then help replace the security equipment the Russians are busy destroying.
Peter Jones, Stroud,
So you're a realist as opposed an liberalist then Michael?
Sarah , Belfast,
If Russia captures Tiblisi and the pipeline from the Caspian Sea then the West would have to go to war regardless of Georgia not being in Nato. The Russians are not as powerful as they make out and such an act could not be allowed to stand. Blair would say the same as Cameron
Adrian, London,
If Britain could act out its role in reality in the same way Brown describes Britain's roles in the world in theory, what a great nation we would be again.
Less Haw Haw and more action is required. Just look at PM Brown's actions on crime, the economy, etc - all words with little action again !!
ian payne, walsall,
Wide of the mark on this occasion, Mr Portillo. It's about time we kept our nose out of other people's business. I'd rather our leaders sort out things closer to home. Abolishing NICE [National Institute for Clinical Excellence] would be a good start.
Jason Dack, Woking, England
Britain's position in the world will soon be comparable to a late late late show on TV.
E.L.SORDO, GLASGOW, SCOTLAND