2013-05-21T19:43:39-04:00 John Glen http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=john-glen Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for John Glen Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3090920 2013-04-16T09:01:51-04:00 2013-04-16T12:45:10-04:00

John Glen http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glen/
Recent discussions with my constituents sprung to mind, on the issue of DFID spending levels and maintaining development aid at 0.7% of GNP. I believe it is right to honour this commitment, whilst also robustly challenging the priorities and effectiveness of this spending. I welcomed the call by the House of Commons International Development Select Committee to encourage the government to link our aid in Pakistan to improvements in the integrity of the Pakistani income tax regime.

With Britain's increased investment comes increased influence; and the government should use its growing voice in the developing world to place an emphasis on capacity-building projects which will ultimately reduce the need for aid amongst recipient countries in the long-term. Goals in this area will not be met overnight. Nor will they be met in convenient, predictable patterns which sync with our general election cycle.

Recognising the deep, long-term nature of development work is critical to reasoning why we cannot duck out of our obligation when we feel the financial strain at home, and plan to return to it at a later date. Debate on how to achieve our objectives in development needs to be open and informed. Alongside DFID, the role of the British Council must remain central to our efforts overseas.

It was at the invitation of the British Council that I once again found myself in Afghanistan, having previously visited as a member of Defence Select Committee in 2011. Having seen how our nation exercises hard power in one of the toughest environments imaginable, I was eager to see how soft power was deployed in the same environment.

The work of the British Council in Afghanistan can be divided into three elements: English, the arts, and education and society. During my time in Kabul, albeit brief, I was able to witness examples of all three.

The Council's work in promoting English learning and teaching programmes is arguably their signature activity. In Afghanistan it was good to see that their efforts were fully aligned with the work of the Embassy's Defence Section, and I opened a new English learning centre - the fifth so far. More such centres are due to open to support the Afghan National Army Officers Academy, which will be the UK's legacy military contribution to Afghanistan Academy, due to open in October 2013. The British Council also delivers English classes for personnel from Afghanistan's three main security operations as well as preparing Afghans attending full time military training in the UK.

Next on the itinerary was an English Teachers' training workshop at Kabul's teacher training facility, and part of the effort to raise the quality of education in Afghanistan. Again, the long-term nature of the relationship between the Afghan faculty and the British Council was apparent, and it was clear that British Council staff had secured credibility with those receiving support. It was also heartening to note that in a class of 60 trainee teachers, at least half were female.

In the arts, the British Council have been working with both the Afghanistan Institute of Music (ANIM) and the National Museum of Afghanistan, offering professional leadership development and small grants. In visiting ANIM I was struck by the enthusiasm of the musicians, 50% of whom are orphans, and the transformative impact this facility was having on culture in Kabul. The orchestra had recently returned from a performance in Carnegie Hall, and I hope we are able to welcome them to the UK soon.



As we left the muddy track behind and joined the highway, I considered again the debate around development spending and the British Council's work - some might perceive such efforts as an unaffordable luxury. However, I believe it should be seen as an integral part of the range of soft power activities we deploy to secure goodwill, create mutual understanding, strengthen development, and build the broader cultural infrastructure required to enable good government to succeed in the least stable countries. It is in deepening the cultural roots and self-confidence of a well-educated civil society that the impact of the British Council's work is best understood.

International development is a difficult arena to pin-down to quantifiable metrics of success; meaning expenditure can be left open to mis-characterisation. If 'success' is viewed as 'how many teachers attend a British Council training event' then I think we miss something about quality and long-term impact. The true mark of success will be how many of those teachers will go back from Kabul to teach in far-off regions of the country and be inspired to teach local teachers new techniques and an awareness of British culture and values.

Despite pressure to deliver savings - and the British Council have taken their share - let us be clear that this work is not easy, and the impact is not always immediately apparent.

The road back to Salisbury was a long one, but it wasn't as long as the journey Afghanistan is on to achieve self-sufficiency and security. It seems to me that by re-framing what timetables are realistic, and recognising the value of collaboration and long-term relationships we can understand the role of soft power more fully, and appreciate the long term support the British Council brings to development of the most inhospitable countries in our world today. I am proud to support the British Council and be an advocate for all that they seek to achieve.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1264704 2012-02-09T03:42:46-05:00 2012-04-09T05:12:01-04:00

John Glen http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glen/ House of Commons Defence Select Committee Report on Libya is quite rightly very positive about the conduct and outcome of recent operations in that country.

There were three important factors in the operation leading to a successful outcome: a backdrop of clear, diplomatic alignment around UN Resolution 1973; a rapid NATO-led deployment; and the existence of internal resistance seeking to remove Gaddafi.

One can view the headlines of success but fail to see the bigger issues that the experience throws up. The ultimate success of the operation in a short timeframe does not remove the backdrop of the SDSR and the challenge to ensure that future operations of a similar type would be successful whilst maintaining the contingent capabilities that our country needs.

Conflict between military and political objectives

The objectives were not defined sufficiently clearly. It became very difficult to sustain a narrative which maintained it was not about regime change, when it became increasingly clear throughout the conflict that the objective of protecting civilians would not be secured without regime change. The public heard that the action was intended to enable Libyans to define their own future and to protect innocent civilians from a dictator. However, it is difficult not to conclude that the world had lost patience with Gaddafi and his inability to act with any concern for innocent human lives. Few analysts predicted a scenario where Gaddafi remained in power having undergone a Damascene conversion after 40 years of oppressive government. Regime change may be a toxic phrase, but there is a need to be clearer in defining objectives in a way which does not diminish credibility and sow confusion among the public.

Value for money questions

There is no doubt that our Armed Forces did an excellent job in Libya. The Typhoons and Tornados played an important and full role, as did the Navy and Joint Helicopter Command. However this should not stop us asking whether the operation achieved value for money.

The 'Harrier and Carrier' question has been much debated. It is entirely legitimate to ask whether, if we still had an operational carrier, it would have been deployed and had an impact on cost and efficiency of the operation. In evidence to the committee, the First Sea Lord made clear that if we had had a carrier available, he suspected it would have been used. Clearly, a carrier would not have incurred as yet undisclosed costs of fuel transits, accommodation, an extensive equipment supply chain and RAF bases in Italy.

It is noted that the Italians used their aircraft carrier, as did the French, rather than deploy from air bases in Italy and France. This is surely more evidence to support the urgent need for QE class carriers to be brought into service and the carrier strike programme to be regenerated with sufficient aircraft.

Nevertheless, thanks to the choice of weaponry and performance of the RAF there was little collateral damage. However, it would be interesting for the RAF's review of operations to examine whether the same low levels of collateral damage could have been achieved using different weaponry, and whether improvements could have been made so that the same targets were not bombed on multiple occasions.

The headline success of the mission should not negate the need for a rigorous assessment of value for money issues. To facilitate this we need greater transparency over the costs involved in Operation Ellamy: not only the direct costs, but also factors such as the impact on pre-existing training plans, and extra wear on engines and airframes. Given the remit of a shared NATO command a like-for-like comparison with our allies should be undertaken as far as possible.

It is imperative that the lessons taken from the successful operations in Libya should serve to inform and enable successful conduct in any future operations. It remains unclear whether a similar operation could be repeated whilst retaining the ongoing contingent capabilities in a world where the SDSR resourcing decisions are fully implemented.

Gaddafi: a unique challenge

However, it should be acknowledged that it is highly unlikely that we will see another situation where world powers agree a UN resolution leading to an effective air campaign in cooperation with in-country resistance so to achieve a successful outcome in a politically-manageable timeframe. Fortunately, there are few characters like Gaddafi who provoke universal world condemnation. Perhaps President Assad of Syria should be another: but as yet the Russians and Chinese do not seem to agree with this assessment.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1208948 2012-01-16T19:00:00-05:00 2012-03-17T05:12:01-04:00

John Glen http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glen/
Those who have known somebody with a terminal illness will know the distress and concern that can be present towards the end of life, and the real vulnerability that exists amongst families in these circumstances. There is a growing belief that advances in medicine are allowing people to live much longer, but not enjoy any quality of living in those final years of life.

The question to be debated in Westminster Hall on Tuesday is, how should we, as legislators, respond? Clearly it must be with compassion and concern for those who are in a very vulnerable state.

It has been suggested by some that the answer lies in amending the law to allow assisted dying. Those who believe that this should happen invariably cite the need to promote an individual's right to choose, or that given the state of pain and distress that many are presumed to be in, that a premature death at a time of their choosing would be in their best interests.

I want to examine these arguments and explore how the application of palliative care can both alleviate suffering and refocus the important questions that are often under-emphasised in this debate.

Free to choose?

Promoting freedom of choice sounds attractive, but we should question whether assisted dying really does promote genuine choice. Assisted dying is suggested as the means to avoid uncertain future pain and distress, but too often fear of future pain can lead people to make decisions from a position of uncertainty and anxiety. A patient can be fully informed about their treatment options in theory, yet not be in a position practically to evaluate what quality long-term symptom relief could achieve for the alleviation of distress and the securing of an acceptable quality of life.

I cannot see how promoting individual autonomy works effectively when that decision is made in the wake of fear, anxiety and a partial understanding of what the future could bring. This is hardly 'informed consent'.

A healthy 85-year-old in the early stages of Alzheimer's could sign consent for assisted dying at a hypothetical point in the future. Yet that individual may live longer than they anticipated, and in periods of lucidity that patient's decision may not reflect their settled will. It is questionable how robust procedures for respecting and communicating a change in wishes could be codified in law.

Whose well-being?

Arguing for assisted dying on the basis of the perceived well-being of the patient ignores the very real possibility that the patient's well-being would not reliably be at the heart of a decision to end life.

Whose well-being will be promoted? Pressure could be applied - implicitly or explicitly - to elderly patients to end their life by their well-meaning relatives; or doctors could find themselves under pressure to support a decision against their best judgement of the patient's interests. Moreover, the patient themselves could feel under an obligation to their relatives to relieve them of further expense and inconvenience.

Even with basic safeguards, it is very difficult to assess whether somebody had mixed motives for seeking to end their life. The decision to end life prematurely is one with no legal recourse or possibility to undo. The potential for a decision to be made on factors other than the patient's well-being convinces me that legislative change to allow assisted dying cannot be the right response.

Responding with concern and compassion: palliative care

In the face of potential distress and suffering at the end of life, palliative care and the excellent examples of the hospice movement offer us a way forward. Too frequently the assisted dying debate underplays the increasingly comprehensive contribution that palliative care makes for those in the final stages of life.

Britain is the only country in the world where palliative care is a recognised medical specialism, and the quality of palliative care in Britain was ranked as the best in the world by the Economist Intelligence Unit in 2010. Doctors often report that patients express gratitude that they did not seek to end their life having received unexpectedly good palliative care.

Palliative care is a response that recognises the value of life, and reflects compassion and concern for the individual's well-being. Rather than moving towards assisted dying - fraught with its risks, uncertainties, and legal problems - the government should support and promote the extension of excellent palliative care. This will go a considerable way to meeting the physical, social, psychological and spiritual needs of patients at the end of their life.

As a society, we should not be led to believe that a compassionate response to suffering at the end of life lies in promoting assisted dying. It is in caring comprehensively for the person at the end of life that the value of life is affirmed, the value of the individual is upheld, and compassion is truly expressed.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.1111980 2011-11-24T11:29:48-05:00 2012-01-24T05:12:02-05:00

John Glen http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-glen/
The British Council's work in the region over the coming months will include offering citizenship and arts grants to build up civil society; teaching English, including educational radio broadcasts across the country; using UK higher education expertise to create universities that value cultural activity and free speech; and developing curricula and qualifications for vocational education. This type of work has occurred across the globe - including North Africa and the Middle East - since the British Council was founded in the early 1930s. Historically it has enjoyed significant success, including in apartheid South Africa, in democratising countries in Eastern Europe, and in post-Soviet Russia.

There are three reasons why I think the work of the British Council and other organisations such as the VSO and the Commonwealth Foundation are an essential part of a modern and sophisticated foreign policy.

First, the work of these organisations reflects the importance of 'soft power'. Soft power is the power to influence and encourage others to sympathise with our values. It is not a substitute, but rather a complement, to the 'hard power' of economic or military means.

Soft power cannot achieve specific aims within a given timescale in the same way as military or economic activity often can; but it can build healthy political relationships and political capital that complement these more direct tools of foreign policy.

This could involve restoring a country to a point of stability after a prolonged conflict, or engaging in conflict prevention activities. The ongoing use of soft power resources can develop relationships that can lend legitimacy to any necessary military presence, as well as inform any strategic and tactical decisions. The hard power of military intervention, or economic sanctions, is sometimes inevitable in the modern world, but should not be the only component of an effective British foreign policy.

Second, the recent reports of the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) and the National Security Strategy have stressed the value of soft power and diplomacy in response to the challenges facing defence funding. The SDSR refers to a need for a "whole of government" approach to foreign and defence policy, and the value of British culture and language, and participation in international institutions, to Britain's role in the world.

The Foreign Secretary, William Hague, emphasised the importance of soft power when defining the coalition's foreign policy. He argued that soft power institutions such as the British Council and the BBC World Service build up British influence and support British values that we wish to see shared abroad. The Prime Minister also identified the importance of these institutions in supporting democracy in the Middle East and North Africa.

In Libya, this calls for building up civil society so that progress does not rely on any political party or national government. By developing a trusting relationship between ourselves and Libya, especially through the teaching of English, Libya is more likely to choose to embed the values of a modern representative democracy: freedom of expression, citizenship, and international opportunities and cooperation. This will lead to a consolidation of Libyan democracy, greater political stability, and the likelihood of a stronger basis for future trade and positive international relationships.

Lastly, the British Council's work is one example of the UK demonstrating its moral commitment across the world. British involvement with other nations should ideally not start and end with military force: our foreign policy has always centred around the promotion of British interests, but it also has at its heart a long-term commitment to other nations. Building mutually beneficial relationships with other countries should be a continual ambition of our international activity. We must recognise a wider commitment to other peoples, by fostering democracy and encouraging the institutions that help maintain political stability.

The work of the British Council and similar organisations, and its soft power influence, is an important facet of a sophisticated and enlightened foreign policy. The reestablishment of the British Council's presence in Tripoli is a great example of this and a welcome move to help secure a peaceful, democratic future for the Libyan people.]]>