The Reason Review—June 2017
We’re not being hyperbolic when we say that June will go down as one of the defining months of 2017, maybe even the decade. Tragedy struck the UK’s capital three times—the London bridge attacks, the Grenfell Tower fire and an attack on a mosque in Finsbury Park shocked not just the denizens of the city, but the world.
Meanwhile Theresa May lost her majority when Brits went to the polls; the hearings surrounding the firing of James Comey continue to lead the US into near-uncharted political terrain; and two Uber execs were forced to step down from their posts after becoming embroiled in scandal. Plus the diplomatic isolation of Qatar by the other Gulf nations looks set to drastically change the face of politics in the Middle East. This is a big one.
London Terror
Mere weeks after a bomb detonated in the foyer of the Manchester Arena, and with the country still reeling from the 22 deaths and 119 injuries inflicted, the UK fell victim to yet more deadly terrorist attacks — this time in the capital.
At around 10pm on Saturday June 3, a van drove into pedestrians on London Bridge before crashing outside a nearby pub. Abandoning the vehicle, the assailants headed into Borough Market and, armed with knives and clad in fake explosive belts, proceeded to attack revellers in the area. At 10.16pm armed response officers arrived on the scene and confronted three men—Khuram Butt, Rachid Redouane and Youssef Zaghba — who, seconds later, were shot and killed.
The carnage ultimately left eight dead and 48 injured.
ISIS were quick to claim responsibility for the attack, issuing a statement that asserted the three were “a detachment of Islamic State fighters”.
Understandably, given the nature of the grisly events, many reports focused on the tragedy of the attacks. However, for every story of a solemn nature there was an equivalent that tried to highlight the acts of courage and humanity that also took place — stories like that of Ignacio Echeverría, a Spanish skateboarder and HSBC employee who tried to fight off the terrorists with his skateboard in order to save a woman; or that of Charlie Guenigault, an off-duty police officer who took on the attackers with his bare hands in a bid to protect others.
On Wednesday June 14, just 11 days after the attack, Borough Market reopened and Londoners crowded in to pay their respects to the heroes and victims of the tragedy. Donald Hyslop, chair of trustees of Borough Market, said the reopening was a vital part of the “healing process” for the surrounding community.
Despite this renewed resolve, there was another ugly development when Mayor of London Sadiq Khan released a set of figures that showed a fivefold increase in islamophobic incidents since the attacks — ranging from online hatred to verbal abuse and assaults.
Indeed the Mayor’s fears seemed to be confirmed when, on Monday 19th of June, “self-radicalized” Darren Osborne drove a van into a group of worshippers near the Finsbury Park Mosque, killing one and injuring 11 others. The incident is being treated as a premeditated, terrorist attack against London’s Muslim community.
Osborne drove into the group of worshippers just after midnight, killing Makram Ali, 51, of Haringey North London. Eyewitnesses report that Osborne tried to flee the scene but was restrained by members of the gathering crowd while they waited for the police. He was subsequently “shielded by Somalis and Arabs” who, regardless of the horrors just witnessed, were set on protecting the attacker from any possible violent reprisals. The investigation into the attack is ongoing.
It seems fitting to return to the reopening of Borough Market, where the eclectic mix of customers, cultures and cuisines seemed to make the biggest statement yet: that no matter the blood begot by terrorists, and no matter the flag under which they claim to be fighting, the politics of extremism will not divide us.
How to Win Elections and Alienate The People
Though the tragic events around London Bridge and the neighbouring Borough Market brought the respective Labour and Tory election campaigns to a pause, on June 8 UK citizens still went to the polls. Despite the landslide majority that was predicted for Theresa May — a prediction that played a large part in her decision to call the snap election in the first place — when the dust settled, the result was a hung parliament.
May and the Conservatives received 42.4% of the vote, translating to 318 seats (a loss of 13), whilst Corbyn and the Labour party accounted for 40% of the vote and won 262 seats (an increase of 30).
After the result, Theresa May scrambled to form an alliance with the DUP (the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland). Combining the DUP’s 10 seats with the Conservative’s 318 would give May the slimmest of majorities in the house, enabling her to officially form a government, albeit a significantly weakened one.
A formal deal has now been reached, with the Tories promising an extra £1bn of funding for Northern Ireland in exchange for the DUP’s backing in what is being termed a “confidence and supply” agreement. The deal has riled Scottish and Welsh leaders who have branded it “grubby”, and claim that it could weaken the ties that bind the UK.
The surprising results of the election have raised several questions about the Tory campaign and the possible strategic mistakes that it made from the off. Declining TV debates, releasing uncosted manifestos and performing apparent U-turns on social care policies all contributed to some perceiving May’s leadership as “weak and wobbly” rather than the “strong and stable” she repeatedly tried to claim.
If the microscope on the Tories is concentrated on the deficiencies of the campaign and the reduced authority of May, the opposite can be said of Corbyn and the Labour party. Though Corbyn’s recent appearance at Glastonbury has raised further questions on whether he sees eye-to-eye with the PLP, specifically regarding Trident, for the most part Corbyn and the Labour party have defied their critics with gusto. On the back of historic voter turnouts in younger generations, some suggest Corbyn has ratified his long-claimed mandate to serve.
Many are concerned with what this political upheaval means for the future of Brexit negotiations, which were temporarily delayed after the surprise result. But though the future of Brexit, the government, and even the country at large is up in the air, what’s becoming increasingly clear is this: stability is certainly appealing, but significant sections of the UK population are clamouring for change.
A Landmark of Negligence
In any normal month, a terrorist incident in London Bridge would be the biggest story in the UK. Sadly this wasn’t the case in June, when a more domestic tragedy in North Kensington eclipsed the Borough Market attacks — both in terms of loss of life, and in the associated political impact.
Several weeks on, we still don’t know exactly how many people died when Grenfell Tower housing block burned to the ground on June 14. On current estimates, the fire claimed the lives of at least 80 people, but only 18 of the victims have been officially identified, while the Metropolitan Police admit that it may take until next year to determine an accurate death toll. Investigators have struggled to clarify who was living in many of the flats at the time of the blaze, not least because of the large number of undisclosed sublets in the block; North Kensington Law Centre reports that many survivors have been reluctant to speak to investigators due to the fears of repercussions — particularly for residents with uncertain migration status.
London Fire Brigade were first called to the tower shortly before 1am, when a fourth-floor resident awoke to discover his flat was on fire. Two hours later, 200 firefighters were battling an inferno that had engulfed most of the 24-storey building.
While investigations are still underway, several experts have pointed to Grenfell’s external cladding as the probable cause of the fire’s spread. The cladding, which was fitted to the building for rain protection and for aesthetic purposes, was made of combustible material, while a gap left between the building’s walls and the external coating may have created “a chimney effect” that allowed flames to swiftly climb the tower’s sides. In theory, safe building design should have ensured the fire’s containment; as a result of these failures, the official advice for residents to “stay put” was fatally misguided.
Other details have emerged that are as damning to the local authorities as they are depressing. The use of safer, flameproof materials would have cost Kensington and Chelsea Council just £5000 to clad the entire building. The government was warned about the dangers of tower block fire regulations three years ago, while insurers flagged the risk of flammable cladding in May. And perhaps most crucially of all, Grenfell Action Group — a local residents action collective — had repeatedly warned the council of the specific fire hazards and shortcomings within the tower over the course of several years, only to be threatened with legal action.
In the immediate aftermath of the fire, Theresa May received staunch criticism for refusing to directly meet with victims, leading to accusations that her response lacked “humanity”. The Queen’s visit fared slightly better but still drew anger from some survivors, while Jeremy Corbyn’s efforts were broadly well-received — though the opposition leader drew criticism from more affluent members of the borough by calling for vacant homes across Kensington and Chelsea to be reclaimed and given to homeless survivors.
But as political debates continue to rage over the fire, its cause and the appropriate response, those directly affected by the tragedy are still struggling to make their voices heard. Survivors and media representatives were restricted from the local council’s first official discussion of the fire, and calls for survivors to be involved in the creation of an official inquiry have similarly fallen on deaf ears. Even the judge appointed to the investigation, who many see as an ill-advised choice for the role, has warned that it will likely lack the desired scope and focus.
Meanwhile, Theresa May has admitted that as many as 120 housing blocks across the UK have failed recent fire safety tests.
Testimony on the Hill
Politics on the other side of the Atlantic are proving to be equally tumultuous — though arguably such tumult is now par for the course in the Trump administration. In last month’s edition of The Reason Review we gave you a run-down of what is now proving to be one of the central crises of the administration thus far: the firing of FBI chief James Comey.
Since we last checked in, Comey has given testimony in a hearing that lasted for nearly three hours, facing questions from the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill. Chiefly, the hearing looked to shed light on the ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the US election, as well as Comey’s interactions with the president with regards to Michael Flynn, and more granular details about Comey’s tenure at the head of the FBI.
In one striking soundbite, Comey stated: “There should be no fuzz on this whatsoever. The Russians interfered in our election during the 2016 cycle. They did it with purpose. They did it with sophistication. They did it with overwhelming technical efforts.”
This hearing, coupled with that of former attorney General Jeff Sessions’, which also took place this month — and in which Sessions repeatedly refused to discuss his conversations with Trump about the Russian investigation — has seemingly led to renewed murmurings of impeachment for the President—and not just from the usual channels. Robert Mueller, who is leading the special counsel investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 election, is now reportedly looking into investigating Trump for obstruction of justice.
Bookmakers have slashed the odds on a Trump impeachment, with Paddy Power offering 3/1 odds for The Donald to be impeached this year. Regardless of whether you’re partial to a flutter, the stakes here are high.
Uber and Out
June has been a particularly murky month for ride-sharing app Uber, for whom the first half of 2017 has already been riddled with controversy. Having sabotaged a public transport strike against Donald Trump’s first travel ban at JFK, the app lost some 200,000 users in a single day. They’ve also been embroiled in an ongoing sexual harassment scandal, but June’s events really took the cake.
On June 7 it was revealed that Eric Alexander, an Uber executive for the company’s Asia Pacific branch, had obtained the medical records of an Indian woman raped by an Uber driver in 2014. At the time the case prompted Indian authorities to temporarily ban the app in New Delhi, and Alexander traveled to the country to manage the situation. While there he allegedly gained access to the victim’s medical records, which the investigating officer on the case says he “cannot understand”.
Alexander is thought to have acquired the records in order to investigate the legitimacy of the case, which for a time was rumoured to be a fabrication by an Uber competitor, until the attacker was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. Uber has said that Alexander no longer works for the company.
Later in the month Uber CEO Travis Kalanick was forced to step down from his position after five of the company’s largest investors wrote a letter requesting the immediate resignation of his position. In recent months Kalanick has come under fire for fostering a toxic working environment and mysoginistic culture at the company, with another Uber executive, David Bonderman recently claiming that hiring more women to the board would fill meetings with excessive chat. Bonderman too, has since resigned.
Qatar Solo
June saw the surprise arrival of huge diplomatic crisis in the Middle East, the likes of which have not been seen for years among the Arab nations. From 5.50 am on June 5, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt all cut ties with Qatar in quick succession, calling a diplomatic and economic embargo on the country and ordering the expulsion of Qatari diplomats, businessmen and citizens within 14 days. Yemen, Libya, and the Maldives quickly followed suit.
Egypt demanded the return of all its diplomats stationed in Qatar within 48 hours, Saudi Arabia immediately withdrew Qatari troops from supporting its ongoing war in Yemen, and all international flights from Gulf states to the Qatari capital Doha were suspended.
The decision was made in response to Qatar’s alleged financial backing of international terrorist movements, their perceived support of Saudi Arabia’s long-term rival, Iran, and the increasingly outspoken stance of the Al-Jazeera news network, who receive state funding from Qatar.
Bahrain cited “media incitement, support for armed terrorist activities, and funding linked to Iranian groups to carry out sabotage and spreading chaos in Bahrain,” for its own embargo on Qatar.
The Saudi government is particularly concerned about Qatar’s support of the Muslim Brotherhood, a transnationalist group of Sunni Islamists who threaten the hereditary governance of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE. In 2014 all three countries fell out with Qatar over its support of then Egyptian President and Muslim Brotherhood member Mohammed Morsi, recalling their ambassadors from Qatar for a period. But this recent development in relations with Qatar is unprecedented in scale.
As with many ongoing diplomatic crises, it has been suggested that Russian hackers played a part in sparking the isolation of Qatar.
The latest embargo came only two weeks after Donald Trump made a visit to the Middle East to sure up some $110bn worth of defence contracts with the Saudi government, establish an anti-terrorism institute in Riyadh, and encourage the rest of the Gulf states to unite against Iran. While the Saudis are known to have funded extremism in the past, their decision to scapegoat Qatar as the sole supporters of Islamic extremism in the region represents a concerted move to strengthen ties with the US.
For Qatari citizens the crisis threatens to leave them without food and water, as the majority of the country’s food is imported from its neighbours. Supermarkets in Doha were packed in the wake of the announcement as people attempted to ensure they had sufficient food to see out the embargo. Turkey’s president Erdogan has promised to export sufficient supplies to the country as required.
The move presents a serious threat to the already heavily restricted press freedoms in the region, as sanctions will not be lifted until the Al Jazeera broadcast network is closed — Saudi Arabia has already shut the network’s local office within its borders, and Jordan revoked its broadcasting license. It may also pose a serious scheduling problem for the international football community—as yet, FIFA, who plan to host the World Cup in Qatar in 2022, has declined to comment on the situation.
Weapons of Reason issue #4: Power, is available to order now.
