Corbyn is unworthy to be prime minister
The Salisbury attack has thrown things into perspective. For two years, British politics has been focused on Brexit – and the suggestion, often critical, that it “changes everything”. Yes, it brings risk as well as tremendous opportunity. But when Paddy Ashdown said that a coherent international response to Salisbury was undermined by Britain walking away from Europe – what he called the “bane of Brexit” – he was wrong. The West stands united. The only real dissent is found among the irresponsible men and women on the far Left of British public life.
Brexit doesn’t change the challenge that Vladimir Putin poses to the West. Candidate Donald Trump, for example, might have once admired the Russian leader for personal reasons, but since coming to office, he has learnt that for America to be great again, it cannot tolerate Russian aggression. This week, Washington announced sanctions to punish Moscow for cyber-attacks and interference in the 2016 election. America also co-signed a letter demanding that Russia account for events in Britain – along with Germany, France and the UK.
So much for the bane of Brexit: the West’s shared values and inter-dependence have shone through. Yes, there are differences of policy and personality between the governments of Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Theresa May and Mr Trump, but they remain united by history and mutual selfinterest. Mrs May’s recent insistence that intelligence co-operation continue after Brexit has been proved prescient, and her resolute style over the past few days has reminded her own country of the qualities that put her in Number 10 in the first place. The contrast with Jeremy Corbyn has been stark.
Credible European leaders might disagree over the details of national security – such as the reach of the European Court of Justice – but are of one mind when it comes to global threats. Salisbury may not be the only crime in this instance: Scotland Yard now says that a Russian exile who was found dead in his flat this week was murdered. The correct response to even a whiff of foreign interference is outrage, yet Mr Corbyn breaks from the consensus. His fans say he is showing the kind of scepticism that might have kept us out of the Iraq War in 2003. But while it’s perfectly reasonable to ask to see all the relevant evidence, Mr Corbyn’s instinctive response to this crisis has been childish and disingenuous. He asked partisan questions at the dispatch box; he suggested spending cuts to the diplomatic service were to blame; he has spoken out against a rush to war that no one has actually called for. The socialist who is passionate, even zealous, when it comes to the NHS or food banks is nitpicking and tendentious when it comes to national security.
Salisbury has reminded the country that Brexit doesn’t change the reality of two-party politics: either the Tories are in charge or Labour is, and Labour is run by a Marxist. His grip on the party has grown; his supporters have taken control of its machinery and purged the moderates. Until now, his opposition to military action in Syria, his appearances on Iranian-sponsored TV, his support for nuclear disarmament or his friendly attitude towards Hamas and Hezbollah were all somewhat academic, because these are all issues occurring “over there”. But Russia’s latest outrage has occurred “over here”.
There has been a chemical attack in Britain. Put aside tired wranglings about Brexit and we are left at this moment with one political necessity: to stand together. Mr Corbyn has demonstrated that he is constitutionally unsuited to be prime minister. The country deserves far better leadership than Labour has to offer.
The PM’S resolute style has reminded her own country of the qualities that put her in No 10