Tag Archives: Thatcher

Politics

Margaret Thatcher on the Star Wars Missile Defence Program

Leave a comment

Thatcher supported the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI) program which stipulated an aggressive weaponization of space. Reagan’s objective was to rid the world of nuclear weapons, according to Thatcher. Thatcher, however, disagreed (nuclear weapons are a deterrent to war in Thatcher’s estimation) but she knew that she must always remain a staunch ally of the US. Russians didn’t like the SDI proposal because they were concerned that the US shield would end the deterrence against US attack. For Thatcher and others conservatives, the SDI programme was central in the victory of the West during the Cold War. The causation is deterministic in their opinion. SDI = weakened USSR.

The SDI opened up new complications and dimensions to the American and British nuclear deterrence strategy. SDI had implications for Cold War agreements about the weaponization of space. The technological advances would be helpful. The Russians had already begun experiments with tracking systems to repel an American attack. Thatcher believed it made sense to go forward with SDI in order to deal with indirect accidental launch at the very least. The MAD deterrence was the primary reason there had not been a nuclear war according to Thatcher. She didn’t care that Russia felt the SDI reduced deterrence. She felt that it was part of scientific development; it must be carefully controlled and regimented. For Thatcher, science cannot be stopped. She even argues that the Russians will develop this system as well but if they can’t then they deserve to be destroyed.

Thatcher and Reagan agreed on the principles of SDI treaty with Russia at the Iceland Summit (Reykjavik Summit) that stated:

1) the US and Western nations would not aim for superiority but stability with Russia,
2) SDI development would have to coincide with treaties negotiated,
3) the aim is to enhance deterrence,
4) East-West should try to reduce systems on both sides. The Reykjavik, Iceland Summit was crucial in ending the Cold War.

Gorbachev became the leader of the USSR in 1985. He recognized that the USSR economy was in terrible shape and would require massive reforms. The USSR laid a trap for the US during negotiations at the Iceland Summit: they made concessions on British and French deterrents not being included in the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). Those reductions in nuclear arms could occur on hard numbers NOT IN percentages which would disadvantage America with its larger stock-pile. Gorbachev said he would agreed that his nuclear arsenal would be halved in 5 years time. A huge concession! Gorbachev then sprang the trap: SDI must NOT continue….Reagan rejected the deal with Gorbachev since Gorbachev was making concessions he could not retrieve at its conclusion. It was obvious that Gorbachev had wilfully released the numbers on nuclear weapons as a concessions with the trap in mind ie end SDI. Even Trident would have ended had this proposal been accepted according to Thatcher. In these skillful negotiations, Reagan “had written one of the last chapters on the ‘Evil Empire’ that was the USSR which would be relegated to an ash heap in history” according to Thatcher. An INF agreement would have been given priority by Thatcher although she rejected full nuclear disarmament as impossible.

Politics

Margaret Thatcher on the USSR Obsession & Gorbachev

Leave a comment

On the USSR
There are two schools of Sovietology: 1) who plays down the differences between Soviet and Western systems and who generally drawn from political analysis and systems analysis. These people looked at the Soviet Union in terms understood only by liberal democracies. These academics were optimists: confident of rationality. 2) On the other hand there were the historians who grasped that totalitarian systems are different in kind, not just degree, from liberal democracies and that approaches relevant to the one are irrelevant to the other. Thatcher clearly supported the second view. Russians treated well their political elite and foreign dignitaries while their common people starved in the streets. Britain boycotted the 1980 Olympic games although many British athletes attended regardless. The USSR is terrifying for Thatcher. In 1983, relations were more chilly: the USSR had shot down a South Korean airliner killing 269 passengers, Soviets wanted a ‘nuclear free-zone’ in Europe to divide Western powers against themselves, Reagan was announcing the Strategic Defence Initiative.

The capitalist and communist systems were incompatible. Thatcher endeavoured to understand the Soviet system of economics, justice and society. Thatcher disapproved of the handling of the Refusniks; the human rights record of the Soviet Union was appalling. She hated the destruction of the human spirit which she felt occurred in that system of government. Gorbachev was someone Thatcher actively sought out to find common ground. Andropov was the leader of the USSR at this time. Gorbachev was the most well educated. Thatcher visited Hungary, to see how their economy was liberalizing under Soviet influence. She saw some mild signs of pro-free-market progress but they were limited at best. She noted that the economic experiment was conducted under limited parameters. Andropov passed away and Thatcher attended his funeral. Chernenko became the leader.

Gorbachev visited England and Thatcher. Mrs. Gorbachev’s own family had suffered under the forced collectivization. Gorbachev denied the centralization of economic planning. He explained that decentralization into smaller business models was being implemented. Thatcher felt it was not enough. Thatcher believed that a simplistic redistribution system was not the best way to go about running a society.

Politics

Margaret Thatcher on the Westland Affair & Libya

Leave a comment

On the Westland Affair
This is really about Michael Heseltine’s conflict with Thatcher. Heseltine’s personal ambitions were distorting his priorities. The small helicopter company became the core of this conflict. Westland’s central concern was over whether private sector shareholders and directors almost wholly dependent on government contracts should be free to decide its future without government intervention. Thatcher believed it was an abuse of power to utilize government authority to bend the rules. Heseltine favoured a European solution with four international companies. Meanwhile Thatcher supported an American bid with Sikorsky. After Heseltine attempted to have minutes read into a meeting where Westland was not to be discussed, claiming that Thatcher had promised a meeting but did not allow it. Heseltine was forced to obey Cabinet collective responsibility over Westland when Thatcher wanted to move forward. Thatcher controlled cabinet with an iron fist. The result was the Sikorsky won the bid and Heseltine resigned from cabinet in 1986. He stormed out of Downing Street and had a 22minute statement prepared within an hour of his resignation: a premeditated attack. This affair was widely reported in the media.

On the US Raid of Libya
Yvonne Fletcher’s death in London was connected with Gaddafi’s Libyan terrorist regime. The Rome and Vienna airport attacks by a Palestinian group – Abu Nidal – hardened western resolve. Libya was harbouring, abiding and aiding terrorists in their morally repugnant objectives. Thatcher was asked by Reagan to support the bombing of the Libyan government to send a message about supporting international terrorism. Thatcher feared that American action may signal a new cycle of revenge in a country with over 5,000 British nationals. Reagan knew that bombing wouldn’t end terrorism in the region but what a message it might sent, according to Thatcher. Reagan needed to inflict a cost on Libya. Thatcher supported the attack of specific terrorist related sites. The Labour Party wanted Thatcher to disavow use of British airbases. The bombing killed Gaddafi’s adopted daughter and some civilians. Public opinion of the bombing was negative: it did not achieve its target of destroying the Gaddafi regime’s terrorist reign. Thatcher defended it as a success because 1) it had harmed Libyan terrorism, 2) strengthened US-British relations, 3) strong decisive action is rewarded by the British public. Libya retaliated with more terrorism then before.

Politics

Margaret Thatcher on the Irish Republican Army

Leave a comment

On the Ireland Republican Army
October 12, 1984: the Brighton Bomb was the closest to home for Thatcher. Preparing for a speech for the Conservative Party conference in the Grand Hotel, Thatcher was fortunate to be in her hotel room’s bathroom at the time of explosion. She escaped unscathed. Two MPs were killed among others, however. The Grand Hotel was badly damaged in the bombing. Some of the injuries were serious as well. Thatcher was extremely angry. The conference had not been cancelled as a sign of firmness in the face of terrorism. The ruthlessness of the attack had an emotional response from Thatcher: one of hate.

Terrorism is the calculated use of violence – and the threat of it – to achieve political ends. In the case of the IRA those ends are the coercion of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland. Their violence was not meaningless. Terrorists exist in both the Catholic and Protestant communities. Personal risk is made in the service of her country. The IRA is the core of the terrorist problem; their counterparts on the Protestant side would probably disappear if the IRA could be beaten, according to Thatcher. The IRA has plenty of support in areas of Northern Ireland. The ethno-cultural conflict between who should control NI has continued since 1922 when the Republic was created. Even in the Irish constitution, NI (Ulster = Protestant Ireland) is seen as part of Ireland.

Thatcher is a Unionist/Protestants and Methodist. The Conservatives have been committed to preserving the union. Ulster is a controversial word since it denotes Protestantism. Distrust and hatred have mounted far beneath the political surface of this conflict. The Conservative’s 1979 manifesto was to oppose the nationalist minority who are prepared to believe that majority rule would secure their right whether it took the form of an assembly in Belfast, or more powerful local government.

Nationalists/Catholics demand some sort of ‘power-sharing’ so that both sides can participate in the executive functions and a role for the Republic in Northern Ireland: Thatcher believes neither proposal is acceptable. North Ireland’s legal system along with Ireland is based on Common Law model of Stormont. Majority rule ended in 1974 when the NI government was integrated into the UK. Enoch believed that terrorists thrived on uncertainty about Ulster’s constitutional position: full integration would end that. Thatcher felt that devolution was superior; it would strengthen the union.

Find Out More About Thatcher