A Gun On Every Aircraft

British aircraft flying to America are now going to have armed "sky marshals" on them. Not because the British government wants them there; not because their presence will make the planes safer. They will be there simply because the American government told us to put them there.

It is ridiculous to believe that putting armed guards on planes will make them safer. Even supposing that it was possible to vet thousands of people without error, what this ensures is that there will be loaded guns on planes. How many marshals will there be? Enough on every plane to overpower the dozen hijackers willing to die for their cause? The risk is that any gun on board a plane will end up in the hands of the terrorists. Does anyone believe these "undercover" guards will be hard to spot? Especially given they will be boarding the plane before anyone else (to check for hidden devices) and taking seats near the cockpit. Does anyone believe that they couldn't be overpowered and their guns stolen?

Sky marshals have nothing to do with making planes safer, only with the irrational American perception that guns make people safer. It is a broadly accepted leap of faith in America that possession of a gun makes a person safer. That there is no shred of evidence for that is irrelevant. The only "evidence" ever offered is anecdotal - normally of a "if an armed criminal came to your house, wouldn't you be safer with a gun?" kind. To which, the obvious answer is, why would an armed criminal come to my house? I live in Britain - where criminals aren't routinely armed, precisely because the average burglar doesn't expect to confront an armed homeowner. Just look at the shock reaction to an armed car thief. In Britain, this is an almost unheard of occurrence.

The world will be no safer with guns on planes. Especially if, as it now appears, these marshals will only be on planes where America has a reasonable belief that terrorists will be present. It is only a matter of time before a plane is hijacked using weapons carried on legitimately. Instead of giving in to America's irrational belief that guns make the world safer, we should concentrate on real solutions. An obvious start would be tightened security at airports and cancelling suspect flights as Air France quite correctly did last week.

Adding guns to planes may make Americans feel safer, but it makes the world more dangerous for all of us.

Graham Robinson. 31st December 2003.

2003 in Review

2003 is most immediately memorable for the war we couldn't stop. But, I suspect, in the longer term Iraq may be one of only a number of issues for which this year becomes noted. Perhaps most obviously, this year marked the beginning of many problems which are likely to ultimately lead to the removal from power of both Bush and Blair.

2003 has been a disaster for Blair. Popular opposition to his policy on Iraq, the death of David Kelly, rows with the BBC, revolts threatened over top up fees and foundation hospitals, disappointment over reform of the Lords and the lack of a fox hunting ban, and two health scares - albeit minor ones. And it surely doesn't help that Gordon Brown continues to look strong - looking healthy and vigorous as he takes on new fatherhood, with unemployment down, the economy stabilising, and the Christmas treat of figures proving that his 3.2% growth forecast - derided in the serious papers at the time - is in fact bang on target.

Poor Tony. He's staked his reputation once too often. "I'll resign this time. I will. Really. Then you'll be sorry." The new year will be no kinder - with the Hutton inquiry to report and mass revolts on the back benches to look forward to. I reckon he won't last the year. Look for a resignation on health grounds around early summer.

Across the Atlantic, Bush looks little better. Jobless totals are up, and so is the deficit. Many states are bankrupt, and the country is struggling to pay for Iraq. All of which has left the dollar weak against the pound and, particularly embarrassing, against the euro. There's also scandal after scandal attaching itself to the administration. Neil Bush's business dealings and use of prostitutes, Rumsfield shaking hands with Hussein after Iraq used chemical weapons, the Plame-Wilson leaks, Halliburton ripping off the tax payer, and energy. None of this is likely to lose Bush his job directly. If they won't impeach over his lies about Iraq, there will certainly be enough fall guys and apologists to cover these problems. But it all makes his re-election look less certain than six months ago. In fact, his only major hope is that the Democrats self-destruct. Unfortunately, that's exactly what they look like doing.

Discussion of Blair and Bush brings us inevitably back to Iraq. The cost is becoming clear - $85 billion and counting, over ten thousand Iraqi dead, over 600 coalition dead, infant mortality doubled (from its already disastrous sanction levels) and millions without electricity or clean water. While some reconstruction is occurring, attacks on both occupying forces and civilians appear to be increasing. Meanwhile the benefit is becoming less and less clear - not only no weapons of mass destruction, but no programs likely to have produced any in the near future. No Iraqi constitution, possibly not even elections. In fact, other than the capture or death of Hussein and his immediate circle, it isn't terribly clear what has been achieved. It will be maybe a decade before the nature of the new regime becomes clear. Until then, victory claims are premature.

If the bulk of 2003 was dominated by the attack on Iraq, and the accompanying damage done to our democracies and international institutions, the year ended with more positive developments. The capture of Saddam Hussein allowed the invasion of Iraq to finally be justified - even though the cost seems to be excessive. But that was followed by the one unexpected benefit to result from the Iraq invasion. Libya announced that it was abandoning its nuclear program, and passing intelligence on terrorists to America. The fact that Libya appears to have had no nuclear program of any consequence doesn't appear to have dampened the enthusiasm of the hawks. While any decision that lessens nuclear proliferation is to be welcomed, it seems a bit much to welcome Libya back into the brotherhood of nations, especially when there is no sign of the appalling human rights record improving.

Nearer home, 2003 was a time of hope and disappointments. The euro's success on the international money markets has proven that the single currency can work, even though the cost appears to be price inflation in many countries. However, the disaster of the latest EU summit means that a European constitution looks as far away as ever. Time, perhaps, to concentrate on formalising our own constitution.

Here at Online Opinion, the year has been generally positive. Despite taking most of September off, 55 columns were published, including this one, and readership has grown to well over a thousand a month, a figure that has grown most months.

So that was 2003. Much to complain about, but also much hope. Millions did engage with politics, although they were ignored. Iraq was a grand and costly adventure too far, one which is increasingly difficult to justify. However, next year may be tougher for our leaders. Another Iraq will be harder to achieve, and in Britain at least, a change of leadership may be imminent. I have a feeling that 2004 will prove to be the year of Gordon Brown.

Graham Robinson. 31st December 2003.

archives :: links :: faq :: feedback

Find out how you can support Online Opinion

Online Opinion is a trademark owned by Graham Robinson. All rights reserved. The copyright on all articles, columns, and letters on this site is owned by the original author. The copyright on all other material is owned by Graham Robinson. Permission is granted to download and store these pages for personal or research purposes only, and only as is consistent with normal viewing of web pages. All other rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely link to any page within this site, as long as ownership of the material linked to is clear. No advertisements may be associated with this site, whether explicitly or implicitly, without prior written permission.