No, this isn’t about a Hollywood B-movie or the latest Harry Potter sequel. It’s actually another example of political fact proving stranger than fiction
Peter Mandelson, the twice disgraced, controversial former British Cabinet Minister, has resigned as European Union Trade Commissioner to make yet another return to Government. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has elevated him to the House of Lords and has made him Secretary of Business. What’s even more extraordinary is that Mr Brown and Mr Mandelson have long been considered sworn enemies, ever since the latter outmanoeuvred (double-crossed, some say) Mr Brown to propel Tony Blair to the leadership of the Labour Party in 1994 and ultimately to Number 10 Downing Street in 1997.
Mr Mandelson, one of the principal architects of the makeover of the Labour Party as New Labour in the 1990s, earned his nickname, “Prince of Darkness”, for his mastery of the dark arts of political spin, deviousness, manipulation and bullying, all based on a formidable intellect and capacity for strategic thinking. His quick mind and command of the nuances of the English language also allow him the luxury of speaking out of both sides of his mouth, without appearing to lie outright. An acclaimed schemer, his talents have unsurprisingly also earned him many enemies.
After the 1997 election, Mr Mandelson was rewarded with a position as a trouble-shooting Minister without portfolio. He was then made Secretary for Trade and Industry in July 1998. By December he had resigned for taking a secret loan from a ministerial colleague to buy an expensive house in London’s Notting Hill.
Mr Blair then brought Mr Mandelson back in October 1999, as Northern Ireland Secretary. But he was obliged to resign again in January 2001, due to allegations of misconduct over a passport application for a couple of Indian billionaire businessmen. An official inquiry later cleared Mr Mandelson of any wrongdoing – for one so politically adept, he was stunningly naïve at best – but the damage had been done and his enemies rejoiced.
In 2004 Mr Blair gave him a plum posting in Brussels as Britain’s EU Commissioner. On the news of his appointment, bookmakers offered odds of 3/1 that he would not serve his full five-year term. They were right, but for the wrong reasons, even though Mr Mandelson’s tenure was not without controversy.
He began as the EU’s top trade negotiator under inauspicious circumstances, getting into an unseemly and undiplomatic public row with the then United States Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, now the World Bank President, over a trans-Atlantic dispute between aircraft manufacturers Airbus and Boeing.
A committed free trader, Mr Mandelson was one of the strongest advocates for a new global trade deal under the Doha Round, even if this often put him at odds with the US, the developing world and even some of his own EU constituents.
Earlier this year, French President Nicholas Sarkozy publicly accused him of trying to sell out European farmers and criticized his handling of the Doha talks. In addition, many developing countries and NGOs have criticized Mr Mandelson’s aggressive push for trade liberalization at the expense of the development of poor countries and the environment.
Indeed, Mr Mandelson’s aggressive conduct of the Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations with the different regions of the Africa-Caribbean-Pacific grouping, and particularly with the Caribbean, in addition to his responsibility for the EU’s unilateral denunciation of the Sugar Protocol, have left a bad taste in the mouth.
Although regarded as an able and tough negotiator, and widely recognized as a hard worker with an almost technocratic mastery of his brief, Mr Mandelson has never been considered the straightest or most trustworthy of men. For him the political end has always justified the means and his ambition has always appeared to dictate his personal agenda.
Perhaps, with the collapse of the Doha Round in July and no resolution in sight with the imminence of the US elections, the political opportunist in Mr Mandelson felt that it was time to move on.
It is widely felt that Mr Brown has brought Mr Mandelson back, in a desperate throw of the dice to reconcile the warring Brownite and Blairite factions in the Labour Party and to bolster his own position as Labour leader and Prime Minister, in the face of his plunging popularity within his own Party and nationally.
However, Mr Mandelson has not enjoyed an altogether smooth re-entry into the cut and thrust of British politics. He returned to London, puckishly asking journalists “Third time lucky?” But Mr Mandelson is already attracting more controversy for having granted trade concessions worth up to £50 million a year to a Russian oligarch who entertained him on his yacht during the summer, when he was still Trade Commissioner. And tellingly, his new portfolio will not include the job of the Government’s Anti-Corruption Champion, despite his predecessor having held the brief. The critics say that this is clear proof that Mr Brown still does not trust Mr Mandelson.
Nevertheless, as our then UK-based correspondent, John Mair, wrote in a piece in January 2005 just before Mr Mandelson visited Guyana “the Prince of Darkness defies all the natural rules of political gravity and careers”. Depending on your perspective, Mr Brown’s gamble could yet turn into another political farce, a horror show even. But Mr Mandelson’s remarkable comeback story is yet another twist in his tale of political amorality and expediency woven around flawed political genius.
