The Prime Minister appeared to distance himself from the imperial past when he suggested that Britain was to blame for decades of tension and several wars over the disputed territory [Kashmir], as well as other global conflicts.
Boot-licking: A. History: D. Yes, we are to a certain extent historically involved way back but… The drive to partition India came mainly from the likes of Jinnah. An essay on C20th Indian sub-continent history by Monday Master Cameron or you’re no longer head prefect.
Tristram Hunt, the Labour MP, historian and former television presenter, said: “To say that Britain is a cause of many of the world’s ills is naïve. To look back 50-odd years for the problems facing many post-colonial nations adds little to the understanding of the problems they face.
Quite. And let’s listen to Tristram Hunt (not least because he must have been bullied something chronic at school) when he perhaps nails it…
“David Cameron has a tendency to go to countries around the world and tell them what they want to hear, whether it is in Israel, Turkey, India and Pakistan.”
Quelle surprise! He’s made a career of doing it hree as well. Recall he worked in the media before politics…
Mr Cameron was in Pakistan to make amends for any offence he caused last year by accusing the country of “exporting” terrorism.
Well, it does, doesn’t it? But we can’t say that because being “offended” is much worse than being “blown-up”. You can after all bury the remaining body parts after the later event.
On a visit to India last year, Mr Cameron was criticised when he said Britain should approach its former imperial possession “in a spirit of humility”.
Ah Hell! Shouldn’t the leaders of great nations (and Britain) meet as equals? Wouldn’t that be more dignified for both parties? I mean we both have vibrant economies, aircraft carriers and space programs…
We are tripling aid to Pakistan for schools - that’s GBP600m. Note: it might be easy to observe this is as a form of dhimmigelt and there is certainly truth in this - the Tories themselves have justified defence cuts by aid increases but there is another way of looking at it. Given Mr Cameron’s patrician roots is this not perhaps a deranged post-modern incarnation of the “white man’s burden”?