Every deck of cards comes with two jokers. On the global stage these days, this role is being filled by Donald Trump and Boris Johnson. But while Trump is not answerable to anyone, Boris Johnson — known as Bo Jo in the British tabloid press — reports to a tough boss.

His appointment as foreign secretary by Theresa May was met with disbelief and sniggers when it was announced soon after the Brexit vote ended David Cameron’s stint as prime minister. Johnson had led the Leave campaign, and announced his candidature for the top job after Cameron’s resignation. But he was stabbed in the back by his key ally, Michael Gove, who declared that he was also a candidate. This farcical scenario permitted May to emerge as the top contender.

Another thing Trump and Johnson share, apart from vanity about their blond mops of hair, is the tendency to shoot from the hip without pausing to reflect on the consequences of their words. This has got Johnson into trouble on a number of occasions. In his weekly column in the Daily Telegraph, he once likened Hillary Clinton with a “sadistic nurse in a lunatic asylum”.

This time, the gaffe-prone foreign secretary is in trouble because he spoke his mind about the Saudi role in regional conflicts. He accused Riyadh of twisting religion for its political agenda, and of “puppeteering proxy wars”. Barely had he spoken these words in a panel discussion in Rome that the prime minister’s office issued a statement saying these were Johnson’s personal views and did not reflect the government’s position.

While he has been criticised for deviating publicly from a long-held government policy that places Saudi Arabia at the centre of its network of alliances in the Middle East, many in the UK have supported his honesty in calling a spade a spade. The Saudis have been criticised in the media and in parliament for their barbaric bombing campaign in Yemen that has killed over 10,000 people, most of them non-combatant men, women and children. Hospitals, schools, homes and markets have been wantonly destroyed, and the country’s inadequate infrastructure demolished by wildly inaccurate and callous bombing.

Two parliamentary committees have recommended that Britain should halt the sale of weapons to the kingdom, and demand an independent inquiry into the vicious campaign. But the government has ignored these recommendations, and declared that Saudi Arabia is a key ally in the “fight against terrorism”. The reality, of course, is that the sale of weapons to the kingdom has generated vast profits and thousands of jobs in Britain. Johnson, for his part, has stated in parliament that the Saudis have promised to launch an investigation into the bombing of a wedding party that killed 140. Accepting the findings of such an enquiry would be akin to believing that the Saudis would hold democratic elections and give women the right to vote.

Johnson will be in Saudi Arabia over the weekend, and it will be interesting to see how he wriggles out of the jam he has got himself into this time. He has privately told friends he has no intention of apologising for his words. But already, critics are suggesting he is not suited to his job. Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a Conservative ex-foreign secretary, said he thought Johnson “might end up being more comfortable in another senior cabinet position.”

As it is, May has divided the Foreign and Commonwealth Office into three components to deal with Brexit negotiations, thus diluting Johnson’s authority. At a recent function, she pointedly said that Michael Heseltine, a Conservative grandee, had choked an old dog to death. Then, addressing Johnson, she went on to twist the knife: “Remember, Boris, that a dog can be put down when he’s no longer useful.”

Johnson, long accustomed to poking fun of others, now finds himself the butt of jokes. Recently, Philip Hammond, the British chancellor, had a dig at his colleague by bringing up Johnson’s failed attempt to become prime minister. The foreign secretary’s friends claim that these barbed attacks on Johnson undercut his position when he’s dealing with foreign governments.

But the reality is that his counterparts in European capitals and elsewhere find it hard to take Johnson seriously. His persona of amiable buffoon played well with voters in England where eccentricity is valued, but it leaves most foreigners bemused. After publicly and successfully pressing to leave the EU, his talk of a “soft Brexit” rings hollow. During the Brexit campaign, he had famously promised that the UK could have its cake and eat it too. Now, in his discussions at the EU, he has been firmly told that there would either be a “hard Brexit or no Brexit”. His European counterparts have been clear that there will be no “a la carte” exit from the EU.

Johnson’s swift putdown after his Saudi gaffe shows how hard it is for a country’s senior diplomat to speak his mind if his views differ significantly from the official position. But then diplomats are not paid to tell the truth, but to spin the official policy whether they agree with it or not. For years, our diplomats lied about our nuclear programme in the face of overwhelming evidence that we were indeed developing a nuclear device at Kahuta.

Indeed, Johnson himself has twisted the truth when it suited him before he became foreign secretary. During the Brexit campaign, his most effective scare tactic was to warn voters that Britain would be flooded with millions of Turkish immigrants when Turkey joined the EU. He completely overlooked the fact that Turkey was nowhere near joining the union, as well as the fact that any member country could veto its inclusion. Now as foreign secretary, he insists that he will help Turkey’s membership bid.

Whatever happens next, Johnson will remain a colourful and unpredictable figure in British politics, just as Trump’s presidency will not be boring, whatever else it may be.

irfan.husain@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, December 12th, 2016