Blair Goes Wobbly

Jewish World Review ^ | March 12, 2003 | David Warren

[Hillarys nightmare]

David Warren Blair goes wobbly

If public statements of position are anything to go by -- and they sometimes are -- the U.S., Britain, Spain have already lost the vote in the Security Council, no matter how they phrase their resolution. The vote was supposed to happen yesterday, and has been set back at least until tomorrow, possibly Friday, undermining the stated deadline of Monday for Iraq's Saddam regime to show a "strategic decision" to obey the 17 U.N. resolutions it has defied, lo these last 12 years of the slowest "rush to war" in history.

The gap is now clearly unbridgeable. Those not already onside with the U.S. are opposed to war under any circumstances at all. The revelations of the last few days -- including the discovery by U.N. inspectors in Iraq of such "smoking guns" as a gas-spewing air drone, and delivery devices for chemical and biological bombs; the revelation on Al-Jazeera TV of one of Saddam's suicide-terrorist camps; the public threat by a member of Iraq's cabinet to gas the Kurds again; multiple reports of the placing of explosives in Iraqi oil wells both north and south; the allegation that France has been shipping spare parts for the repair of Saddam's air fleet through third parties in the Gulf -- such overwhelming evidence of the true state of affairs is ignored alike by media and diplomats. They have reached their decision, to isolate and damage the United States as much as possible, and grant Saddam a pass. They don't want to know about anything that doesn't advance their argument, just as the appeasers of Hitler in a former generation did not want to know.

The difference between sides is doctrinal. President Bush first announced his own "doctrine of pre-emption" about 17 months ago, and won reticent international support as far as Kabul. It is a position the U.S. has consciously taken in deviation from past foreign policy, to address new and very frightening circumstances in the real world. France and her supporters, quite apart from various cynical motives for defending the monstrous Iraqi regime, do not accept the U.S. premise. As in any doctrinal dispute, the issue is about reality itself. They wish to continue, and to compel the U.S. to recognize, an international order that served the world adequately enough in the olden days; and they will persist in this until the current reality catches up with them.

But the United States is not going to wait for another "9/11". It will, as Donald Rumsfeld quietly mentioned yesterday, proceed if necessary even without British support. The U.S. did not choose unilateralism, it is having unilateralism thrust upon it. But if it is stuck with that fate, then it will fight alone for human freedom; as Churchill was prepared to lead what was still available of the British Empire, to fight alone in 1940.

Indeed, the only reason the U.S. introduced a new, and 18th resolution to the Security Council, and has been delaying the vote, is to provide the political cover to keep Tony Blair in office as British prime minister, and thus keep extremely useful British forces in the field in Iraq. The only remaining advantage of delay is for the new Turkish prime minister to give the U.S. forces that have actually been unloading in, and transiting, Turkey, the legal cover of a fresh Turkish Parliamentary vote. For as I am convinced by witnesses on the scene, the U.S. and Turkish armies are now in fact fully co-operating towards joint action on Iraq's northern front, whatever you read in the papers.

Mr. Blair has started to hedge his bets. Though he declared he was willing to lose his job, to stand by what he believed in, he, too, has begun "to weasel". The British foreign office yesterday began to make distance from the U.S. position, and cast doubt on whether Britain would keep its promise to act in Iraq even without U.N. support. Mr. Blair is recoiling, domestically, from one of the most sustained propaganda campaigns in British history, a 24/7 battery of lies from the BBC and similar media, that has succeeded in whipping up an anti-war frenzy on the backbenches of the Labour Party, as well as filling the British streets with Saddam's pacifist allies.

Yet that is only the proximate cause for his sudden loss of backbone. The conditions to which he has succumbed were created and abetted by a profoundly cynical power-play, from France, Germany, and Russia -- one which, in the French and Russian promise to use their vetoes to kill any U.N. decision to enforce its resolutions, is now exposed as a frontal attack on the interests of the United States -- an attempt to create a new balance of power, by cutting America down to size.

The French et al. smell blood, they are not going to back off now when they see the prospect of doing real damage. Their strategy was from the beginning to split the British from the Americans by humbling Mr. Blair, to delay the inevitable full-scale attack into the Iraqi hot season, when the fighting would be more difficult and thus the casualties higher; to isolate the U.S. diplomatically; to galvanize the international peace movement against the Bush administration; and to improve Saddam's prospects for creating a catastrophe when war comes.

The French betrayal is as total as it was surprising, after earnest promises from President Chirac to support the U.S. in return for elaborate concessions on U.N. Resolution 1441. They think they now have President Bush in a fox-trap: from which he cannot escape without chewing off a leg. They may be right: he may now have no choice but to chew off the British leg.

But whether they are right or not, they will now reap the whirlwind

[Hillarys nightmare]

It's all about Power! And while the people suffer in Iraq, and else where in the world,the powerfull of "Old Europe" continue to argue as to who is going to come out on top! These Nations are concerned only with their own little power bases, and are not in the least bit concerned about us or anyone else for that matter! They have never, nor will ever possess a "Moral Highground!" They are altogather "A-Morale Power Hungery Piggs!"

[DoughtyOne]

I don't think we could ask much more from Blair. He's been as supportive as he could be in the face of stiff opposition. Anyone have an idea what would be going on in our own nation if the Democrats controled the House or Senate?

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

For a puddling socialist, he came near to being a man. He certainly has done better than I ever expected.

Sad to see him wimp out at the last, when he knows what's in store for his country if he fails them.

Maybe it's just stratergery?

[Grig]

"Maybe it's just stratergery?"

That's what I was thinking, he can claim he was trying to get more time, but the US wouldn't allow that and forced a vote so he had to vote for the US for the sake of the UN.

[CatoRenasci]

I don't think Blair himself will go wet; rather, I think his party will replace him as leader, forcing him to resign as prime minister. Then, the new Labour Head Boy will pull Britain out of our coalition. England's system is different from ours -- you can stay in power for up to 5 years as long as you don't lose a vote of confidence, but if your party cans you, you're out of office (though still a member of Parliament). This is very bad.

[ZULU]

"Mr. Blair has started to hedge his bets. Though he declared he was willing to lose his job, to stand by what he believed in, he, too, has begun "to weasel".

Blair did all that was humanly possible to try and assist us. Its not his fault that 66% of the British public is composed of Isalmic immigrant, anti-Semites, ingrate America-haters, etc.

We should STOP trying to play footsies with the third world tyrants and French and German mow-lifes in the U.N. The U.N. is a dead organizm. Bush should DO IT - NOW!!! Attack Iraq, wipe up Saddam, then switch gears to deal with the North Koreans.

We are the biggest guy on the block, most other big guys hate us as well as more than a few little guys. They always will, as long as we are top dog. If we want to stay top dog, we had better start acting in our own and the rest of world's best interests and ignore those who are envious of us.

[linn37]

Hey Blair did his best,its his job to represent Britain and if they tell him no he must listen.

[ZULU]

"Mr. Blair has started to hedge his bets. Though he declared he was willing to lose his job, to stand by what he believed in, he, too, has begun "to weasel".

Blair did all that was humanly possible to try and assist us. Its not his fault that 66% of the British public is composed of Isalmic immigrant, anti-Semites, ingrate America-haters, etc.

We should STOP trying to play footsies with the third world tyrants and French and German low-lifes in the U.N. The U.N. is a dead organizm. Bush should DO IT - NOW!!! Attack Iraq, wipe out Saddam, then switch gears to deal with the North Koreans.

We are the biggest guy on the block, most other big guys hate us as well as more than a few little guys. They always will, as long as we are top dog. If we want to stay top dog, we had better start acting in our own and the rest of world's best interests and ignore those who are envious of us.

[The Wizard]

stop this post, the headline is a lie

[johnb838]

Funny how the old imperialists now face the spectacle of their old clients coming for them.

I hate to say that about Britain. I thought they woke up too when they lost more people on 911 than they had in a single incident since WWII. I for one, am ambivalently grateful that the scope of the world-wide socialist threat is now becoming apparent.

[diggerwillow]

This is great, why do I feel like we just pushed the terrorists out of Afghanistan only for them to relocate in France, Germany, and now England.

[Congressman Billybob]

Yep, the proposed Resolution in the UN is a lost cause. This is what President Bush warned the UN against, last fall. So the UN has ripped a page out of the League of Nations book -- the League failed prior to WW II, first with respect to Italy's invasion of Ethiopia, and then with respect to Germany's build-up of weapons and forces that were barred by treaty.

My UPI column this week deals with this precise subject. See first link, below.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, not yet up on UPI, and FR, "Once, Twice, Three Times a Moron"

Latest book(let), "to Restore Trust in America."

[CatoRenasci]

I agree Blair has done his best to date, but if he backs down and keeps power, his will have been what the British call a "moderate effort", and history will record him as a man who knew what had to be done, but preferred to remain in office rather than do what was right. If he makes the Labour Party fire him out in the open, he will be a hero, and will go down as a real statesman when the history of this period is written.

[MadIvan]

He can't back down and keep power. He will have caved, fatally, to the Left, and afterwards be their hostage.

Remember, the Labour Party respects Blair, but it doesn't love him. It will turn him into their whipping boy if he does cave.

Regards, Ivan

[Dazedcat]

"Yet that is only the proximate cause for his sudden loss of backbone. The conditions to which he has succumbed were created and abetted by a profoundly cynical power-play, from France, Germany, and Russia -- one which, in the French and Russian promise to use their vetoes to kill any U.N. decision to enforce its resolutions, is now exposed as a frontal attack on the interests of the United States -- an attempt to create a new balance of power, by cutting America down to size."

And that is the bottom line, no more and no less. Saadam could take a 5 year old, parade him in front of the world and shoot him in the head......and it wouldn't matter a bit.

This is about global politics on a perverse and sickening scale. But I wonder if American politicans will remember this when it comes to the next round of foreign aide handouts.....or "free" trade agreements. I seriously doubt it.

I respect people who have opposing views with regard to war, but this global powerplay is so obvious to me it's almost a joke...........almost.

[Hillarys nightmare]

I would be more than happy to stop this post if it where in fact a lie.

I personally love Blair and the Britts! But the fact remains that the Labor party is doing great damage to him. I don't blame Blair if he backs away from us to some degree in order to stave off his attackers and save his position as Prime Minister. That action is understandable.

If you have evidence to the contrary, then please repley! I really would hope that this Editorial is wrong.

[Wolfstar]

Good day, Ivan. Another query for you, if you have the time and patience to answer: What are the Tories up to in all this? Have they been able to strengthen their political position at all?

[CatoRenasci]

Well, he's got a choice: keep his pecker up and get sacked, but be respected; or go wet, get sacked, and be universally despised. I'd like to believe he'll do the right thing, based on how he's done since 9/11, but on the other hand, his entire prior history would suggest he'll funk. What do you really think will happen?

[Preachers Kid]

I don't know why we EVER went to the UN. What a waste of time and energy. I don't recall Clinton getting the UN blessing for any of his Monica diversions.