Leaked e-mails and Farage as replacement?

Bravo to Tom Tugendhat speaking out so strongly on this issue just now and clearly expressing his anger

I totally agree suziewoozie that the identity of the leaker is paramount for closure on this.

When I said ‘it tidies things up’ I meant that it resolves the situation the BA now finds himself in - his position became untenable since the leak. Even though it wasn’t his fault. The embarrassment factor would have been huge going forward. If Trump wouldn’t have met him there was an impasse. A new ambassador is for the best now and his resignation helps the government out of an awkward spot. Obviously they were backing him (good) but it still left them without an active ambassador over there.

If it does nothing else it shows just how much influence a far right lunatic of a POTUS has over the U.K. - an influence which will only increase post Brexit. Three cheers for all that.

Thanks for that clarification Urm

Yes he had to resign after the Brexit trade talks with Liam Fox were cancelled by Trump.
Sadly Trump is one of the people we are going to rely on when we come out of Europe.

The thing with Trump is that he will not be magnanimous in ‘victory’ but will now push things even further

Boris Johnson now getting a lot of flak for not supporting him last night - maybe the result of this might be that his choice of replacement might be more circumscribed than he had originally hoped.

Darroch did not need to give his opinion of Trump in the denigrating way he did, he could have used much more diplomatic language. Having had the leak it is clear that he could not do the job, so resigning was the logical outcome, Ambassadors do need to have confidential communications when that fails they can’t do the job.

It seems to me that Sir Kim had rumbled how to work Trump and let's face it that couldn't be permitted could it? One of the messages he sent "It's important to 'flood the zone': you want as many as possible of those who Trump consults to give him the same answer. So we need to be creative in using all the channels available to us through our relationships with his Cabinet, the White House staff, and our contacts among his outside friends."
How to get what you want- well he simply had to go! It seems evident that we will not be better off with him gone.

Dsvidhs he didn't need to use 'diplomatic' language. The cables were never meant to be read other than by those who really needed to know what they were dealing with with this president and his govt. They needed direct and specific info based on his personal views and long and valuable experience. It's a great pity that he's had to resign but he could not stay in that post.
Bah! Trump!! What is wrong with Americans?!

Darroch did not need to give his opinion of Trump in the denigrating way he did, he could have used much more diplomatic language.

I'm pretty sure that diplomats have, for centuries, given their confidential reports to their governments in 'robust' language. All this pearl clutching over Sir Kim's supposed bad manners is, frankly, laughable.

Perhaps someone would like to tell me why 'inept' is inappropriate and how it could be more 'politely' put?

David I’d like to add to that there were a string of leaked memos stretching over 2 years and that we have no real idea of the whole context of the selected leaks. But for example, Tom Tugendhat, who I greatly admire, has said that the Russian comment was Sir Kim quoting other sources ( and I believe both of them).

Exactly. These were confidential ‘inner circle‘ emails as opposed to general communications. Someone in that small group has betrayed him for their own benefit.

Senior diplomats ought to know better that criticise our most important ally in such a derogative manner. He only has himself to blame for it leading to him losing his job. It seems there are also a lot of civil servants in Brussels and the UK who also think their own political opinions are more important than supporting the independent future the majority of the UK voted for so I, personally, would be glad to see the back of the lot of them and replace them with people with a more positive deposition.

Laura Kussenberg said on SKY earlier that these messages known as ‘diptechs’ (diplomatic tech opinions) can be accessed by authorised staff only and it could be that a member of staff ‘revisited’ the forum.

Computer experts will now be analysing the hard drive gobbledegook to ascertain which people accessed Kim Darroch’s posts.

If I was the leaker I’d be sh*****g myself right now! Oh god they know they will be caught and punished.

I would be on Valium and unable to sleep ...
?

Yes Urm I was wondering about being able to track who accessed the diptechs. I know that for example, electronic information in social service departments, the police, nhs etc track all those who access the files but as long as the leaker was authorised to access, how would that identify the leaker? Or was LK suggesting that all these particular files have recently been revisited and that would point a finger?

Jane, Maisie and others, diplomatic language might be

“ its difficult to predict the outcome of any issue” instead of “unpredictable

“does not always react in the way that previous presidents have” instead of “inept”

We all agree that the message was an accurate portrayal of Trump but it is possible to get the message across without being insulting. These days when almost anything can be hacked, recorded or leaked great care must be taken with all communications even supposedly secure ones.

We all know that just one word said thoughtlessly can ruin any relationship, most importantly within the family.

You honestly think that a Trump would have cared how Darroch worded his emails? An insult to Trump is an insult in his eyes and therefore deserving of his ire.

quizqueen Would you have our senior diplomats tell lies to their employers in PRIVATE diplomatic reports, then, which are meant only for the eyes of the person they are sent to, through secure channels? What do you think the job of an ambassador to a foreign country is about? Swanning around at state dinners and smarming obnoxious heads of state?

Well, yes, it is partly about that, but also it is about being the eyes and ears of the foreign office and letting them know the exact position in the country. It is about summing up the policies and personalities of the individuals they encounter, and they have many years of experience in doing just that. Then they pass on their impressions through PRIVATE channels. They expect those channels to take their summing-up to the people it is meant for, not to be hacked and hijacked and used for spiteful clyping. Trump's ambassadors are doing the same thing for him. It is part of the job and all administrations know it.

Would you have had our ambassador tell his bosses IN CONFIDENCE what a nice chap that President Trump is, how astutely he analyses international situations, what a firm grasp he has on world affairs? What wrong decisions might they make on that information? Just how would the ambassador wrap up the news that he considered the POTUS to be a dork?

Perfectly summed up Elegran

Diplomatic language is for diplomatic exchanges. Reports to senior bosses are bald fact, stated as clearly as possible. The ambassador is not a green beginner, he has been sending these reports all his diplomatic life. We haven't seen his previous ones, but presumably they were just as robust.

He has a right to trust those who have access to his securte corespondence.

It’s all about finding the leaker now.

Kim Darroch was doing what his government was paying him to do.

However (not his fault) someone read his reports & leaked them. This made his position untenable.

David inept does no equal ‘difficult to predict the outcome of any issue ‘. It means clumsy, showing or having no skill, incompetent, inexpert, crude - or in undiplomatic language bloody useless. Given what we know of Trump, I think Sir K was very restrained.

Sorry meant to say inept does not equal ‘does not always react in the way previous presidents have’. That was pretty inept of me ?

And saying that it is difficult to predict the outcome of any issue does not state clearly that the unpredictability is rooted in Trump himself.