Blair lends his backing to Bush

Evening Standard ^ | 3/24/04 | Joe Murphy

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Tony Blair will fly to America to lend support to George Bush in his fight to win a second term as US president.

The Prime Minister will stay as President Bush's guest in what will be seen as an extraordinary display of support.

It is thought to be the first time a Labour premier has thrown his weight behind a Right-wing Republican during a US presidential election - and is bound to cement Mr Blair's position as the White House's favourite foreign statesman.

Details of the trip have yet to be decided but a stay on the President's home ranch at Crawford, Texas, or talks at Camp David are being mooted. "It will happen during the summer," a British official told the Evening Standard.

The disclosure came as Mr Blair used a four-day foreign tour to shore up support for the US-led coalition in Iraq.

He embarked on a tricky diplomatic mission to persuade Spain's new socialist premier not to carry out his threat to pull out 1,300 troops from Iraq.

Downing Street aides are hopeful that newly-elected José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero can be persuadedto "modify" his election pledge to withdraw from the coalition. A hopeful sign came when Mr Zapatero invited Mr Blair to meet him for private talks this morning, just before a state funeral for the 190 victims of the Madrid train bombings.

Officials described the meeting as "exploratory" but believe a fresh United Nations resolution backing the planned July handover of power to the Iraqi people could enable Mr Zapatero to perform a U-turn. "It depends how deeply he has impaled himself on the election campaign hook of pulling out," said one official. "His position may be more flexible."

Last night Mr Blair and wife Cherie had a valedictory dinner with defeated Spanish leader José Maria Aznar, one of the staunchest allies in Iraq.

Mr and Mrs Blair were joining Prince Charles for the national memorial service to the bomb victims, the first such state funeral for members of the public in decades.

He was then flying on to Lisbon for talks with Portuguese premier José Manuel Durao Barrosa, one of the few remaining senior European allies in Iraq, whose country has 130 troops serving in the British sector around Basra.

The Prime Minister is hoping his diplomatic tour will win desperatelyneeded international support for the coalition in Iraq.

His support will be gratefully received by President Bush, now under siege over allegations by a former security adviser that he ignored warnings of the terrorist threat posed by al Qaeda before September 11.

The Prime Minister is by far the best known and most admired European leader in America and will want to deliver a strong signal that he stands shoulder to shoulder with the US leader in the war on terror.

Mr Blair earned the deep gratitude of former President Bill Clinton by going out of his way to demonstrate his support and friendship during the Monica Lewinsky affair. But Mr Clinton was a political soulmate unlike the Republican Mr Bush.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Notice how the writer of this piece deplores Blair siding with "Right-wing Republican" Bush... but chirrups sweetly at the memory of Blair getting along with "political soulmate" Clinton, years ago.

Getting along with George W. Bush = BAD.

Getting along with Juanita Broaddrick's probable rapist = GOOD.

Any questions...?

[Redbob]

This is an interesting piece and a great find!

I disagree however with your interpretation; the tone of the article seems rather neutral to me, with the writer pointing out that Blair also had close ties to the former Felon-in-Chief.

[man of Yosemite]

Tony Blair is a standup guy. England sure has produced some great leaders at times, Churchill and Thatcher to name several others.

[luvbach1]

...Right-wing Republican ...

What is particularly right wing about President Bush besides his zeal to defend the United States? And if that's "right wing," what is "left wing?" A lack of zeal to defend the United States?

[TheBigB]

There is no way that Blair...as good a friend as he's been...will OPENLY endorse Bush for reelection. His party would dump him as PM in a heartbeat. This "lending support" can be read in many ways. Unless Blair has decided that he will not stand for reelection as PM in the next British elections, this article is misleading, IMHO.

[fdsa2]

Tagline says it all...

[tjwmason]

Notice how the writer of this piece deplores Blair siding with "Right-wing Republican" Bush... but chirrups sweetly at the memory of Blair getting along with "political soulmate" Clinton, years ago.

I disagree with your characterisation of these remarks. Remember that this is a British newspaper, to refer to President Bush as a 'right-wing Republican' is merely to ensure that readers know that the Republicans are the right-wing party.

As for Blair as Clinton's soul-mate, this is utterly true. They spent the entirety of the late '90s in a transatlantic embrace which caused major gastro-gymnastics whenever I watched the television news.

My reading of this is to draw out that here is a left-wing Prime Minister who is supporting a right-wing President. Previously the British Tories got on well with Republicans (they still do, b.t.w.), and the Labour Party got on well with the Democrats.

Before Bush was elected the British Ambassador in Washington (I think that was Sir Christopher Meyer, though this is from memory and may be wrong), was sent to visit Crawford in an attempt to ensure that if Bush won, there would not be a massive falling-out as a result of Blair's leftism.

[tjwmason]

There is no way that Blair...as good a friend as he's been...will OPENLY endorse Bush for reelection. His party would dump him as PM in a heartbeat. This "lending support" can be read in many ways. Unless Blair has decided that he will not stand for reelection as PM in the next British elections, this article is misleading, IMHO.

I do not think that the article is utterly misleading. The visit will be covered by diplomatic niceties, but there have been a couple of stories recently which suggest that Blair does want Bush to win (realising that Bush is the centre of the co-allition, and the War on Terror). Obviously he will not openly support Bush, that would be a massive breach of protocol; when the British Tories assisted the Republicans in 1992 that was kept well away from Prime Minister Major.

The dynamic between Blair and the Labour Party is most interesting, and I believe will become more so. In many ways he followed on the work which Neil Kinnock undertook of bringing the Labour Party back to the centre of British politics (it went very very far left, just as Thatcher was dragging our politics more to the right). However, many in his party still are not at all keen on him, especially in Parliament.

Under the rules of the Labour Party, the Parliamentarians cannot kick him out as leader (and therefore as P.M., this is what the Tories did to Thatcher, b.t.w.), a leadership election would involve the Trade Unions (Labor Unions in America?), as well as the normal party members.

There is little doubt that Blair will lead the Labour Party into the next election, however, he may well stand down part way through the next Parliament. Remember that in Britain Parliament is elected, and the majority party leader becomes P.M., the P.M. himself is not elected, and therefore Blair could easily stand down part way through.

It would be most interesting to see what the Labour Party does to Blair if they are re-elected but with a vastly reduced majority (as seems likely). Many have supported him only because he produces votes (even those of us who cannot stand him admit that), if he loses that skill then he could well loose Parliamentary support very quickly.

F.W.I.W., his likely replacement H.M. Chancellor (sort of equivalent to the Treasury Secretary) Gordon Brown, has very close ties with many at the top of the Democratic Party.

[tjwmason]

What is particularly right wing about President Bush besides his zeal to defend the United States?

I do not think that that is necessarily what the writer is trying to communicate. This was in a British newspaper, and when they refer to foreign politicians they tend to put in right-wing or left-wing to identify the party's position; most people with a modicum of intelligence know that the Republicans are the right-wing party, but the Evening Standard has many readers without such a modicum. Remember also that over here republican means wanting to get rid of the Monarchy (i.e., revoluntionary communism).

[justshutupandtakeit]

You are right there is no way Blair would openly endorse Bush nor that Bush would ask him to. Actions will speak louder than words though to any listening.

On a related note Kim Il Jong has offered to come campaign for John Al-Kerry.

[luvbach1]

This was in a British newspaper, and when they refer to foreign politicians they tend to put in right-wing or left-wing to identify the party's position.

My point was that Bush is not really right wing except in comparison to the far left. Your point notwithstanding,it seems to me that anyone in the UK who is literate enough and interested enough to be reading a political article in a newspaper would know the general orientation of the Republican party without being told it is right wing. Literate Americans don't have to be told the Labour Party is liberal do we? Also, I didn't know that, in England, wanting to be rid of the monarchy equated to revolutionary communism unless the goal is to replace the monarchy with a communist government instead of a republic. If it does, I have been informed.