Skipper

Michael Portillo yesterday judged that Gordon Brown has not, as in so many other areas, shone in foreign policy. We used to criticise Blair, he says, for grandstanding around the world, but at least, he poured in some energy, made a difference for good or ill, and offered genuine leadership. The situation in Basra, he reckons, where British troops played no role in the US-Iraqi success, would not have occurred under Brown's predecessor.

According to some reports, senior US officers and the Iraqi government have now lost faith in British forces.

Maybe Brown's current virtual invisibility encouraged Cameron to make the bold ploy for an Oppostion leader of making his own visit: in Brown's absence, he provided a substitute NATO prime minister for Mikheil to chat to. But, following on from my post yesterday, Dave's suggestion that we embrace Georgia into NATO, Russian ire notwithstanding, is singularly ill-advised rubbish. Article 5 of the treaty obliges us to come to the aid of any member suffering an attack.

Is it really conceivable that we in the UK, will go to war- with all the concomitant nuclear danger- over Georgia? What kind of forces can we put in the field, given our already overloaded commitments elsewhere? If Russia, say, absorbs Georgia, are we really prepared to go to war? And if we are tested and desist, what price a NATO guarantee in the future? Dave really should be listening to wiser counsels on foreign policy issues.