FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Tony Blair Versus the British People

One man against the British people. In Britain, at least, this is Tony Blair’s war now, and his alone. The people whose views he was elected to represent want none of it. The streets of London will tomorrow bear witness to that truth.

It seems certain that the rally against the impending attack on Iraq will be the largest political demonstration in British history. Perhaps it is less a demonstration, more an assembly of a people, rejecting senseless war. It will certainly be a rebuke to those who argue that no one cares any longer about politics. Against a background of the worst crisis in international relations for a generation, and a week in which the government did nothing to stem a mounting atmosphere of public tension, the demonstration also represents a refusal to be rendered powerless.

Blair’s fabled propaganda machine has laboured might and main for more than a year to convince the British public that being hooked to the back end of Bush’s wagon train, as it moves to war, is the place to be. As his spin efforts descend to the level of the comic–filching students’ theses and passing them off as the work of “British intelligence”–it is abundantly clear that he has failed. This has turned the issue of war into an issue of democracy as well. If, after a year of persuasion, the government has failed to convince the country that war is necessary, it simply has no right to proceed.

The “collateral damage” of Bush’s war drive is mounting daily–the cohesion of Nato, the chimera of a common EU foreign policy (and Blair’s fantasy of being at the heart of Europe) and the post-1945 structure of international law included. All of this seems merely to be whipping the US political class into a still greater frenzy of bellicosity. How long before France is officially designated a “rogue state” and Gerhard Schroder becomes a card-carrying member of the “axis of evil”?

It now must be clear to everyone that the US is hell-bent on war at any price, scattering to the winds any and every sensible proposal for a peaceful resolution to the crisis in its rush to get the shooting started. A fatal game of catch-22 is being played with the Saddam regime, in which every discovery of an unauthorised weapon is hailed not as evidence that UN inspections are working but as proof of Iraqi duplicity, while every failure to find such weapons is evidence that they are being concealed. But who can still believe that this has anything to do with weapons of mass destruction, any more than it has to do with terrorism? It has become an exercise in US military-political machismo.

This week’s historic worsening of relations between the major powers is a warning that one nation’s determination to enforce its global hegemony is bound to lead to endless and escalating conflicts. Bush and Blair are now playing Osama bin Laden’s game. He, more than anyone, seems to be looking forward to the war as a chance to replenish his ranks. He knows that every shot of Iraqi children being pulled lifeless from the rubble will send hundreds of recruits flocking to al-Qaida’s banner.

The prime minister’s last hope–not of preventing military conflict, which he shows no signs of any longer seeking to do, but of pacifying at least a section of his critics–lies in a second UN resolution. Yet he has devalued the UN, both in this crisis and for the future, by his declarations that he will only go the UN route if the UN acquiesces in advance to the Blair-Bush position.

Jack Straw is fond of waving aloft his well-thumbed copy of the UN charter. Perhaps he could identify which clause codifies the “unreasonable veto”, a concept introduced into international law by the prime minister last week. In fact, if a proposal is vetoed by the UN, it does not go ahead. Yet the prime minister, echoing the US president, arrogates to himself the right to declare such a procedure “unreasonable”. With such an attitude, which would make a nonsense of any rule-based or legal system, the British government is treating UN procedures with contempt.

A second resolution driven through the security council against this background of intimidation loses any moral authority. It cannot now make a wrong war right. Tomorrow the world will say no to war in rallies across the globe. But London will be the most important–because ours is the war leader who can be broken. And if he remains deaf to a nation’s plea for peace, he will be.

ANDREW MURRAY is chair of the Stop the War Coalition, which is organising tomorrow’s demonstration in London with CND and the Muslim Association of Britain. He can be reached at: apdmurray@hotmail.com

 

More articles by:
July 23, 2018
Pam Martens
Koch Industries Is Staffing Up with Voter Data Scientists to Tip the November Election to the Extreme Right
Binoy Kampmark
Ecuador’s Agenda: Squeezing and Surrendering Assange
Vijay Prashad
America’s Reporter: the Hersh Method
Colin Jenkins
Exposing the American Okie-Doke
Patrick Cockburn
What Boris Johnson Doesn’t Know About British History
Jack Random
Asylum Seekers in the 21st Century
Howard Lisnoff
How We Got Sold on Endless Wars
Ed Meek
Trump Has Taught Us Some Valuable Lessons About Executive Power
Myles Hoenig
Trump, the Mr. Magoo of American Diplomacy
Winslow Myers
The Mind Reels
Thomas Mountain
Ethiopia’s Peaceful Revolution
Weekend Edition
July 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Atwood
Peace or Armageddon: Take Your Pick
Paul Street
No Liberal Rallies Yet for the Children of Yemen
Nick Pemberton
The Bipartisan War on Central and South American Women
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Are You Putin Me On?
Andrew Levine
Sovereignty: What Is It Good For? 
Brian Cloughley
The Trump/NATO Debacle and the Profit Motive
David Rosen
Trump’s Supreme Pick Escalates America’s War on Sex 
Melvin Goodman
Montenegro and the “Manchurian Candidate”
Salvador Rangel
“These Are Not Our Kids”: The Racial Capitalism of Caging Children at the Border
Matthew Stevenson
Going Home Again to Trump’s America
Louis Proyect
Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders and the Dilemmas of the Left
Patrick Cockburn
Iraqi Protests: “Bad Government, Bad Roads, Bad Weather, Bad People”
Robert Fantina
Has It Really Come to This?
Russell Mokhiber
Kristin Lawless on the Corporate Takeover of the American Kitchen
John W. Whitehead
It’s All Fake: Reality TV That Masquerades as American Politics
Patrick Bobilin
In Your Period Piece, I Would be the Help
Ramzy Baroud
The Massacre of Inn Din: How Rohingya Are Lynched and Held Responsible
Robert Fisk
How Weapons Made in Bosnia Fueled Syria’s Bleak Civil War
Gary Leupp
Trump’s Helsinki Press Conference and Public Disgrace
Josh Hoxie
Our Missing $10 Trillion
Martha Rosenberg
Pharma “Screening” Is a Ploy to Seize More Patients
Basav Sen
Brett Kavanaugh Would be a Disaster for the Climate
David Lau
The Origins of Local AFT 4400: a Profile of Julie Olsen Edwards
Rohullah Naderi
The Elusive Pursuit of Peace by Afghanistan
Binoy Kampmark
Shaking Establishments: The Ocasio-Cortez Effect
John Laforge
18 Protesters Cut Into German Air Base to Protest US Nuclear Weapons Deployment
Christopher Brauchli
Trump and the Swedish Question
Chia-Chia Wang
Local Police Shouldn’t Collaborate With ICE
Paul Lyons
YouTube’s Content ID – A Case Study
Jill Richardson
Soon You Won’t be Able to Use Food Stamps at Farmers’ Markets, But That’s Not the Half of It
Kevin MacKay
Climate Change is Proving Worse Than We Imagined, So Why Aren’t We Confronting its Root Cause?
Thomas Knapp
Elections: More than Half of Americans Believe Fairy Tales are Real
Ralph Nader
Warner Slack—Doctor for the People Forever
Lee Ballinger
Soccer, Baseball and Immigration
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail