Britain's Bloody Shirt Syndrome

The alliances based on ‘five-way’ compromises and the coalition governments formed after the elections held one after the other in the UK, which is supported by the USA and the genocidal Zionists, and which supports Israel from its bases in Cyprus, are far from solving today's problems. As seen in the case of Israel, this systematic of insensitivity is also challenged by the extent of crimes against humanity. In other words, it is seen that the ‘parliamentary system’ is far from being able to resolve the problems that develop instantaneously under today's conditions, where emergency, state of war and rapid decision-making in war are priorities, without causing problematisation. Almost the following assumption, which should not exist, has become accepted. ‘One party stability, coalition instability.’ So what is a parliamentary system of government? In the simplest sense, it is a system of government in which the legislative and executive powers are separated from each other in a ‘soft’ manner. In this system, the executive branch is ‘two-headed’. That is to say, on the one hand there is the ‘king’ in constitutional monarchies or the ‘head of state’ in republican regimes, who has only a representative role, and on the other hand there is the ‘council of ministers’. Executive power is collective. The prime minister and ministers make joint (often delegated) decisions. On the other hand, the British Parliament, which was initially unicameral, became a bicameral parliament with the ‘House of Lords’ and the ‘House of Commons’ from 1544 onwards.

One of the distinctive features of the parliamentary system is that the king or the head of state is not responsible. The council of ministers headed by the prime minister, on the other hand, is responsible to the parliament and subject to judicial control. In other words, it is a system in which ministers are directly responsible and accountable to the ‘Supreme Court’ like the Sword of Damocles. As is well known, the government emerges from the parliament and takes office with its vote of confidence. In a parliamentary system, the legislative and executive branches are so opposed to each other that they can even put an end to each other's legal existence. In other words, the parliament can dismiss the prime minister or ministers through a vote of no confidence. On the other hand, the government has the option to dissolve the parliament and lead the country to elections. In parliamentary systems of government, the same person can simultaneously serve in both the legislative and executive branches. This is quite natural. In a parliamentary system of government there is co-operation between the legislative and executive branches. The government may participate in the work of the legislature. (1) To put it briefly, the ‘checks and balances’ between the legislative, executive and judicial branches are also the parameters of separation. The main idea is the separation of power between the government, the parliament and the judiciary, and to prevent any one of these three organs from becoming more powerful and leading to dictatorship. However, a fair assessment reveals that parliamentarism has reached a dead end in today's conditions.  

Indeed, after the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and re-nominee Rishi Sunak called for a general election on 4 July 2024, the British electorate announced, drenched in the rain outside the Prime Minister's residence at 10 Downing Street, that they would once again go to the polls a month later to decide on a new government. (2)

The British people took a cold shower when he said that if re-elected he would reintroduce conscription after 54 years.  In fact, Rishi Sunak and his party cadres seem to have assumed a role similar to that of Winston Churchill, the powerful Prime Minister of the Second World War, when he said on 13 May 1940, ‘I promise you nothing but blood, toil, tears and sweat.’ This means that the situation is grave enough to bring back conscription.

Indeed, the Atlantic Bloc led by Pax-Angloamericano (the USA and the UK) is fighting on three different fronts and, regrettably, is heading towards defeat on all three fronts to the point of almost abandoning the theatre of operations. The Hill writers Mark Toth and Jonathan Sweet, who liken US President Joe Biden to James Buchanan, one of the former presidents who dragged the US into its civil war, express the defeat of their country on three different fronts clearly, albeit with regret, with the words ‘The US is losing the ideological third world war to Russia, China and Hamas.’(3)

Certainly, not only The Hill writers, but also the US Congress in its January report on ‘Great Power Rivalry’ clearly states that the US is on its hegemonic deathbed. Rishi Sunak's important output includes the model of national service, whereby British citizens, after completing their high school education at the age of 18, are required to do either full-time compulsory military service for one year, or voluntary community service for 25 days a year, one weekend a month. The fact that politicians are publicising this situation, which they do not want at all, dictates a difficult situation to which Great Britain was subjected after the Second World War.

As is well known, Ukraine has entered the most critical situation it has faced since the beginning of the war. In today's environment, where Kharkiv, the second largest city of the country, has become vulnerable to air strikes in all respects, it is unlikely that NATO will be able to repel the RF Armed Forces by simply reinforcing Ukraine with weapons, ammunition, vehicles, equipment and hardware. In other words, since Ukraine is about to lose its determination and resolve to fight, there is no other solution other than the reinforcement of forces in the region. It should not be forgotten that the demand for NATO membership in Ukraine, which cannot be intervened with military troops because it is not a member of NATO, has been one of the main reasons for the start of the Russian invasion.

Unfortunately, Ukraine made its official application to join the alliance in September 2022, during the war. Although NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Ukraine would be part of the alliance in the long term and 21 months have passed, he has not yet been able to present an accession timetable. For this reason, Russia's leader Putin has and continues to express on every occasion that he considers NATO membership as a national security threat, saying that Ukraine should be neutral. The example of NATO's intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina, on the grounds that the Serbs had committed massacres in the context of intervention in Ukraine, is frequently mentioned in NATO these days. This is why Sunak's opposition to compulsory military service centres on this point. 

After Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stated that he had received approval from King Charles III for a general election on 4 July, the Conservatives have almost nothing but the controversial Rwandan deportation plan, that is, the fight against illegal immigration. On the other hand, Labour Party leader Keir Starmer is quite sure that he will benefit from the falling votes of the Conservative Party and therefore his promise of change in the United Kingdom increases the expectation that he can come to power.

What is put before the British voters in this election is the reintroduction of compulsory military service in the UK. There is no need to even ask whether it can come; yes, it is considered compulsory. According to a study conducted by the Research Centre of the Turkish Grand National Assembly in 2013, compulsory military service is applied only in Austria, Southern Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland and Greece within the European Union (EU) countries, and in Denmark, Estonia, Norway, Turkey and Greece within the 28-member NATO. As I have just clearly stated, the situation is so grave that compulsory military service must also be extended to include personnel and logistics integration and civil defence activities in the event of a declaration of mobilisation.

For this reason, the Republic of Turkey has upgraded its preparations in this regard to the highest level and, in this sentence, has adapted the ‘Regulation on Mobilisation and State of War’ to today's conditions and the presidential regime. In a world increasingly divided into two poles, NATO's military intervention in Ukraine in terms of power indicates that a stage has been entered that could spark a ‘Great War’ by risking a direct confrontation between American and Russian troops in Ukraine.

In 1960, the United Kingdom abolished conscription, which, interestingly enough, was introduced in 1947 by the then Labour government after the Second World War. Now the same situation is being presented by the Conservative Party government. The critical nature of this situation is evident from the fact that it has been proposed to the government by both the UK Armed Forces and the British Intelligence Service (BIS). Political governments do not want to wear this bloody shirt that will remove them from power. As you know, the expression ‘wearing a bloody shirt’ is used to describe the first power struggles in Islamic history. In other words, it is known that in democratic systems where power is determined according to voter votes, such situations within political parties will be avoided as much as possible. However, such situations have to be reluctantly brought to the agenda by the ruling political parties or coalitions at the suggestion of the institutions directly responsible for the survival of the country. It is a difficult situation which no party can undertake during election campaigns.

However, it can be said, dear readers, that this resonant phenomenon presented by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is a highly probable course of action that, with a Domino Effect, conscription bills will be brought to the agenda immediately in other European States in continental Europe, starting with France.

Footnotes

(1) Kemal Gözler, ‘How can governments in Turkey be stabilised and effective?

(An Essay on the Presidential System and Rationalised Parlâmentarism) Türkiye Günlüğü, Issue 62, September-October 2000, p.26

(2) Ahmet Gürhan Kartal, ‘ANALİZ-Rishi Sunak calls for elections in the United Kingdom despite signs of certain defeat’, Anadolu Agency, 23.05.2024; https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis/analysis-rishi-sunak-calls-uk-election-despite-signs-of-certain-defeat/3228045 Access Date 02 June 2024/

(3) Bercan Tutar, ‘The day of reckoning is approaching’ Sabah Newspaper, 24 May 2024; https://www.sabah.com.tr/yazarlar/bercan-tutar/2024/05/24/hesap-gunu-yaklasiyor/Access Date 02 June 2024/