The day after his state of the union speech, President Bush repeated his conviction that Iran was “the world’s primary state sponsor of terrorism”. That’s the way the US ended up occupying Iraq, and it is how any move will be made against Iran.The President’s thinking on Iran is readily discernible. A few hours before Bush’s inauguration, Vice-President Dick Cheney said on a radio talk show that “Iran is at the top of the list” of trouble spots because of “a fairly robust nuclear programme”. A similar public pronouncement about Iraq by Cheney proved to be unfounded, but had, nonetheless, the political effect of generating public support for invasion.

That line must be vigilantly policed, however difficult it may sometimes be to define. Labour crossed it with its untrue implication that Mr Howard as home secretary had sought to treat leniently associates of his cousin who was jailed for drug offences two years ago. The Conservatives crossed it by wrongly implying that David Miliband, the Cabinet Office minister, had fast-tracked his adoption of a child in the United States.Generally, however, complaints of dirty tricks and negative campaigning are misplaced and counter-productive. Robust exchanges that personalise disagreements over parties’ records and promises are the life blood of a functioning democracy Bring them on..

War is only a cowardly escape from the problems of peace Thomas Mann (1875-1955)

War is only a cowardly escape from the problems of peace Thomas Mann (1875-1955)
President Bush’s rhetorical flourishes against tyranny, both in his state of the union speech and his inaugural address, have left Britain, the rest of the EU and much of America wondering if Iran will be the next target of US military might The consternation is great, and not without cause. One of those realities is that parties will make negative and personal attacks on leading figures in other parties. Another reality is that most politicians – and Mr Blair is particularly good at this – hypocritically pretend to eschew such tactics. But there is a difference between “personal” criticism of someone’s actions and record as a public figure and attacks that intrude on the private or family life of a politician.

Eight years ago the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled against their “demon eyes” poster of Mr Blair because it depicted the Labour leader as “sinister and dishonest”. Sinister and dishonest? How about a shadowy picture of Mr Howard trying to hypnotise you into believing “I can spend the same money twice”?The truth is, though, that the ASA was wrong then and we should now take a more robust attitude to the realities of political campaigning. Yet the Conservatives could be forgiven for assuming the worst, not least because Trevor Beattie, Labour’s ad man famous for his French Connection FCUK campaign, has a reputation as a tester of the boundaries of taste and decency that, like Mr Campbell’s, goes before him. Historically, too, the Conservatives are entitled to feel aggrieved.

Nor were the Tory complaints about the flying pigs and “Shylock” posters well founded. It is probably a tribute to Labour’s lack of anti-Semitism that it failed to occur to anyone in the party that the posters might be seen as offensive by some Jews. His reputation as a hard man goes before him and coincides with a rumpus over Labour “dirty tricks” aimed at Michael Howard, the Conservative leader, personally. The return of Alastair Campbell to the heart of the Labour machine, with a paid job as “head of strategic election communications”, will be deplored in some quarters. He is, after all, the man who tried so aggressively and failed, ultimately, to persuade the British people of the case for war in Iraq. We can observe that Tony Blair demonstrates a confidence bordering on arrogance in recalling the man who “advised” the Joint Intelligence Committee on the presentation of its dossier But we cannot complain of impropriety. Unlike in his previous incarnation, Mr Campbell’s salary is being paid by the Labour Party.Equally, much of the indignation over alleged dirty tricks seems synthetic.