The game's up for the blundering Hague

It's over. The game's up. William Hague's long standing claim to be a friend of Israel is plainly just so much hot air. He and Mr. Cameron have little interest in defending Israel against the global jihad, one of the truly great causes of our time. Instead they are lazily regurgitating Arabist sentiment.

It started with a newspaper interview in which the Foreign Secretary was asked to comment on something that Benjamin Netanyahu had said. The Israeli PM had declared that his country should prepare for 'any outcome' in its dealings with Egypt, depending on the course of events in that country. This was an entirely understandable comment. Presumably he meant that Israel had to contemplate the possibility of an Islamist takeover in Egypt, and be forced to rethink its military and intelligence options accordingly. Egypt remains one of Israel's key regional allies after all.

But the foreign secretary then condemned Netanyahu's remarks as 'belligerent,' a remark as absurd as it was immoral. How could it be belligerent to talk of defending yourself against enemies that are sworn to your destruction and which aspire to drive your population into the sea?

Even if Hague is guilty of misinterpreting the Israeli PM's remarks, why is he even saying such things in public? This is a diplomatic blunder of epic proportions.

But this was not all. Here are some other pearls of Hague wisdom from the same interview:

'Amidst the opportunity for countries like Tunisia and Egypt, there is a legitimate fear that the Middle East peace process will lose further momentum and be put to one side, and will be a casualty of uncertainty in the region. It is a time to inject greater urgency into the Middle East peace process.'

Did he mean that the revolutionary upheaval in Egypt could usher in an era of religious extremism, greater financial support for Hamas and Hezbullah and the possibility of a regional conflict? Clearly, that would put the 'peace process' at grave risk. Nope, sorry folks, that wasn't where he was coming from at all. His rather predictable target (yes, you've guessed it) was Israeli 'settlements.' Israel's settlement policy was, he said, 'disappointing' and it could make peace 'impossible' in the next few years.

The implication was that only a fresh settlement freeze would bring the peace process back to life. This despite the fact that the very riots he mentioned in Tunisia and Egypt were not started by unrest over Israel or the occupation. This despite the fact that the PA boycotted talks for most of the previous 10 month settlement freeze, and still refuses to recognise Israel as a Jewish state. This despite the fact that the real causes of the conflict, namely the rejectionist mindset of the PA and its allies, remain insatiable.

For Mr. Hague to spout such fatuous nonsense is a telling indicator of where his party stands on foreign affairs. We should all be very, very worried.