Notes From the Margins…

The Former Friends of Tony Blair

  • June 19, 2014
  • by

Tony Blair’s latest self-aggrandizing and bloodthirsty pronouncements on Iraq have not surprisingly been greeted with a storm of ridicule, contempt, and disgust across a wide spectrum of   political opinion.   Boris Johnson, Clare Short, Malcolm Rifkind, Christopher Meyer and even John Prescott have all joined in the chorus of condemnation.   Johnson says that Blair has ‘gone mad.’ Short says that he is ‘wrong, wrong. wrong.’

Even former Deputy Prime Minister Prescott, who once voted for the Iraq war, now says that he once told Blair that he risked restarting the crusades by going to war.

Beyond the mainstream the condemnation has been even more severe and unrelenting.     Blair is clearly aware of this, and can’t understand why the world doesn’t admire him as much as he admires himself.   In his public appearances he often looks like a haunted and hunted man, a disturbing mixture of arrogance, fanaticism and self-belief that is entirely disconnected from any awareness of the consequences of his actions.

Blair may have become rich, but outside the elite circles that he serves, his reputation is in tatters and it is difficult to imagine how it can ever be restored.     Instead he is likely to spend the rest of his life as a diminished and dishonourable figure, hollowed out by his own lies and haunted by the legacy of folly, violence and death that he helped unleash, and which he has never accepted responsibility for.

Unlike Bush, who has wisely chosen to retire to his ranch and paint puppies rather than make pronouncements on international affairs, Blair continues to call again and again for another war and another round of bombing in one country after another, in the apparent belief that somehow one of them will come out all right in the end and he will appear as the principled leader he believes himself to be.

It is becoming clear that only the most starry-eyed acolytes who floated in Blair’s slipstream or profited from his activities – either materially or politically – actually believe this is going to happen.

It would be tempting to regard Blair as a tragic figure – a great man brought down by his own hubris and a misguided desire to do good.   But Blair is not Creon.   He is not Julius Caesar, and he is definitely not Don Quixote.     In an interview with Mehdi Hassan at the Huffington Post yesterday, Professor George Joffe accused Blair of ‘total responsibility’ for the unfolding disaster that is now taking place in Iraq.

Joffe was one of three academic experts who visited Blair shortly before the Iraq war and warned him of the possibility of post-war chaos and sectarian conflict in the aftermath of the invasion.   Blair was not interested in any of this, and only wanted to talk about Saddam, observing that ‘ the man’s evil, isn’t he?’  Joffe and and his colleagues came away with the impression of a ‘very shallow mind’ who ‘personalised’ the invasion around Saddam Hussein, so that ‘the whole structure of Iraq was utterly irrelevant.. It was very two-dimensional.’

These criticisms do not only apply to Blair himself.   Too many people also saw Iraq in ‘two-dimensional’ terms, when they analysed the country at all.    Too many joined him in the rush to war or simply went along with it because to do otherwise would have harmed their careers, or because they wanted to experience the feelgood sensation of ‘saving’ a country from a dictatorship at no cost to themselves.

Now, to paraphrase Thomas Wyatt, some of those who once sought Blair out are trying to flee him, in order to preserve their own reputations.

One of them is Boris Johnson, who voted for a war he now describes as a ‘tragic error’, but still insists that it was a faintly noble cause, even as he criticizes Blair.   Then there is Baron Prescott, who says now that he disagreed with Blair over the war.     If Prescott disagreed with the invasion then, no one outside the cabinet knew it at the time when his disagreement might actually have counted for something.

The Observer also claims to have reversed its opinions about the war that it once supported, but it still criticizes opponents of the war more than it criticizes the man who helped start it – who still gets regular op eds that he inevitably uses to advocate new wars.

Professor Joffe has dismissed Blair’s latest statements on Iraq and Syria for their ‘inability to understand politics and geopolitics.’    But clearly Blair isn’t the only one.     The liberal press continues to uncritically recycle his pronouncements on every possible occasion, and Blair’s legacy did not prevent the ‘Quartet’ from appointing him Middle East ‘Peace Envoy’.  Nor did it deter Yale University, which once hired him to speak about ‘faith and globalisation.

Other institutions and governments have sought his expertise.  So some of Blair’s former friends may now want distance, but there is little sign that many of them are any more willing than Blair himself to acknowledge how utterly catastrophic his legacy has been.


You may also Like

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

About Me

I’m a writer, campaigner and journalist.  My latest book is The Savage Frontier: The Pyrenees in History and the Imagination (New Press/Hurst, 2018).  The Infernal Machine is where I write on politics, history, cinema and other things that interest me.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


  • No events

Recent Comments