Was entering WW1 the biggest mistake in British history?

Last week The Times invited readers to nominate the biggest mistakes in history. Henry VIII's decision to break with Rome, Margaret Thatcher's signing of the Single European Act, and entering WW1 all figured quite prominently.

But was WW1 quite the mistake it often seems? Here's what I wrote in response to a similar point on the ever-thought-provoking Kate's Home Blog.

Let's just look at what would have happened had the conflict still taken place but with Britain standing on the sidelines. The war would effectively then have been between Imperial Germany/Austria-Hungary on the one side and Russia/France on the other.

In all likelihood, Imperial Germany would have won, which would have meant it controlled virtually the whole of continental Europe stretching from the Atlantic to the Arals. With Russia defeated, there would probably still have been a Russian revolution, but the resulting Russian republic would have been very much a client state of the dominant European superpower, Germany.

The really intriguing counterfactual point about a German victory in WW1 is that the Hohenzollern dynasty would have continued, and Adolf Hitler would in all likelihood have remained an impoverished painter.

So by entering the war, winning it, and giving the Germans a thirst for revenge, we ended up with Hitler. By not entering, we would have ended up with a German superpower controlling the whole of Europe. Take your pick...

I think what this demonstrates is that quantifying whether something is a "mistake" or not is very hard. History tends to have a Yin and Yang about it, and sometimes apparently "bad" things have unexpectedly "good" consequences.

A Christian would say that God ultimately redeems everything, or in the words of an old worship song "he turns our weaknesses into his opportunities."

It's not in fact very Christian, but I would probably have to say that the biggest mistake in recent history was the Clinton administration's failure to take out Osama bin Laden when they had the chance in the mid-90s. Sadly, they were distracted by Kenneth Starr and the Lewinsky scandal.

Closer to home, here are half a dozen things which I wish recent British governments had done differently, the consequences of which have been pretty baleful for all concerned, and which continue to be felt today.

1. Introduced the Barnett Formula (Labour, 1978)

2. Paved the way for Robert Mugabe to take over Zimbabwe (Tories, 1980)

3. Allowed Rupert Murdoch to buy The Times and the Sunday Times (Tories, 1981)

4. Privatised the railways (Tories, 1996)

5. Chosen Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury ahead of Michael Nazir-Ali (Labour, 2002)*

6. Joined the invasion of Iraq (Labour, 2003)

* For the benefit of those who have asked me for my take on the Archbish.

Curse of Petsy strikes Charles Clarke

Petronella Wyatt is well-known in political journalism circles for an ability to put the black spot on the careers of interviewees. She seems to have an uncanny ability to get people to say or do things which are totallty indiscreet - a valuable quality for a journalist, but a dangerous one for politicians.

Perhaps the most famous example was Janet Anderson, a rising New Labour star until she unwisely agreed to be interviwed by Wyatt shortly before the 1997 election. During the course of the interview, Anderson revealed that there would be "more sex under a Labour Government," and of course her career never quite recovered.

Now Charles Clarke has become the latest victim of the Curse of Petsy with a spectacularly ill-judged interview in the Daily Mail which has only served to provide plenty more ammunition about Gordon Brown for Labour's opponents, with Iain Dale suggesting CCHQ should thank Clarke "for doing our dirty work for us."

I can only imagine this outpouring of bile was occasioned by Gordon's failure to restore Clarke to the Cabinet in the enforced reshuffle following Peter Hain's resignation. As the Sunday Tel's Paddy Hennessy reveals here, he certainly won't be coming back now.

Has Nick Clegg found a winning formula?

For the first time since he became Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg found his voice this week with his attack on Gordon Brown over the "surveillance society" at Prime Minister's Questions.

I have taken this as the subject for my weekly column in today's Newcastle Journal, arguing that for all the Prime Minister's exalted talk of extending liberty last autumn, he will struggle to lay hold of this issue so long as ID cards remain on the agenda.

"Another part of the problem is the public perception of the Prime Minister himself. Rightly or wrongly, people see him less as the man who will let a thousand flowers bloom, and more as the man sat in a darkened room monitoring our every move on a set of CCTV monitors.

It may be unfair, but the control freakery that has been associated with the New Labour project from its earliest days does sit easily with a commitment to defending individual freedoms."