Hammond – the man who confused Saddam Hussein with Bashar al-Assad – is Cameron’s new foreign secretary

Although we can’t yet be certain of who’s set to come into Cameron’s fold in this reshuffle, the position that has been confirmed this morning is Foreign Secretary. With William Hague stepping down, this is a prime opportunity for Cameron to stick to his pledge  – albeit a tokenistic one – to reduce the number of  rich, white, middle-aged men, in the cabinet. And so, he appoints Philip Hammond: a rich, white, middle-aged and male.

It’s not just Hammond’s privilege that’s the problem with this appointment.

As is being pointed out time and again this morning, Hammond is a Eurosceptic. Last year, along with Michael Gove he said that he would back Britain leaving the EU if there was an immediate referendum. Making Hammond foreign sec, then, looks like it’s part of Cameron’s move to pander to the Tory right while also appear strong over the EU-issue in the run-up to the general election. It’s certainly a blow for those who want a measured and progressive debate over the EU and the future of Britain’s place within it.

But the list of Hammond’s questionable credentials goes well beyond this. He’s known for being one of the only four cabinet ministers not to vote for same-sex marriage and he reportedly told students that legalising gay marriage would be like sanctioning incest. And remember when he referred to Liz Kendall as Rachel Reeves on Question Time – twice.

It seems a little rich that Cameron, as part of his drive to make his cabinet more diverse, has given Hammond – a man can’t tell two female politicians apart and opposes gay marriage – arguably an even more prominent position in the cabinet. This won’t necessarily make for a cohesive team; Hammond might have a bit of trouble getting along with his new fellow female cabinet ministers, particularly if he calls them Rachel.

In his defence, it’s not just women who he appears to find interchangeable but also men who aren’t white. On Newsnight last year, he got Saddam Hussein confused with Bashar al-Assad. Twice, as if he thinks they’re the same as one another. He also said that Mali – a country where the population is 90% Sunni Muslim – is a majority Christian country. These kind of huge oversights suggest that Hammond has a fundamental misunderstanding (you might even call it ignorance) when it comes to global politics.

This doesn’t bode well for his new position.

Now, as his record shows, Hammond  is a terrible choice for Foreign Secretary, and if we’re going to play the lesser-of-two-evils game then as the lamentation on Twitter over his departure suggests, Hague might prove to be slightly better at the job than successor. But if we’re to look at this in the grander scheme of global politics, it’s not as if he was – by any means – a good foreign secretary.

Let’s not forget that he’s the man who was beating the war drum so vigorously over Syria (and his failure to win the argument on this one might be one of the reasons he’s gone). He’s continued Britain’s arms sales to countries, including Saudi Arabia and Sri Lanka, accused of humans rights abuses. And he also recently signed a £250 million arms deal with Indian PM Narendra Modi, only to the next day promise to erect a monument to Mahatma Gandhi in front of the Houses of Parliament. The irony is rich.

But, if Hammond’s record is anything to go by, it looks like Britain’s foreign policies can only get worse, not better…