Latest post on Left Futures

Now Iran is in his sights. Why does anyone still take Tony Blair seriously?

It simply beggars belief that there are some in the British media who still take Tony Blair even vaguely seriously. On Friday, we were treated to two ‘exclusives’ featuring Blair on the front pages of The Times and the the Daily Mirror. All this in the same week that we learned that Blair had agreed to become a ‘godfather’ to a child of the Murdoch Empire’s own ‘Godfather’, Rupert Murdoch, and that he had helped the murderous Saif al Islam with his exam revision. Quite how both newspaper managed to keep proverbial straight faces while printing homilies from the man who took Britain into an illegal and bloody war, is anyone’s guess. Nonetheless they managed to do so, because this is Britain, a parochial and increasingly backward country.

Blair used the occasion of the 9/11 attacks on civilians in America by civilian terrorists , not to apologise for getting it so horribly wrong over those non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Nor did he apologise to the countless Iraqis who have lost family, who suffered the indignities of a botched occupation or who even now suffer crippling injuries. He didn’t apologise to the families of British servicemen or women who lost loved ones either.

Instead he offered up Iran as the ‘next great threat’, blissfully unaware that he was offering up the prospect of more death and destruction on the weekend that many Americans were commemorating their dead.  But then self awareness has never been one of Tony Blair’s strong points. Not content with outdoing the most hawkish of the remaining hawks, Blair’s predilection for endless war, was rounded off in a separate interview that rejected the view that the failed war in Afghanistan and the illegal one in Iraq, had helped encourage Islamist extremism. “I hear this wherever I go in the Middle East”, says that man who quite unbelievably was made the Quartet’s Middle East representative.

Let us be quite clear, and for the benefit of The Times and the Daily Mirror, and all of those toadying hacks who spent years taking crumbs from Blair’s table; the former British Prime Minister not only knows very little about foreign affairs, he knows even less about history. His actions in Government would suggest also that he should neither be trusted nor taken remotely seriously.

Iran does not constitute any threat to the United Kingdom, whatever Blair may think or whatever that country’s blustering leader Ahmadinijad may imagine. Its influence in the region has of course grown as many of us said it would, with the defeat of Saddam Hussein’s Sunni dominated rule in Iraq. And Iran does seem bent on developing a nuclear programme that could encompass the development of nuclear weapons, much as Israel has done.  However, Iran does have plenty of reasons not to like the British very much, reasons that of course Blair will largely be ignorant. For not only did the British  topple the popular Iranian Nationalist Premier Mossadeq in 1953 for daring to nationalise the country’s oil industry, but successive British Government’s help prop up the Shah and his brutish regime.

Whatever action that may be taken against Iran for breaches of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty is a matter for the United Nations, but it is worth pointing out to Blair that Iran is, at least, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, unlike Israel. Perhaps Tony Blair might like to bring this discrepancy to the next AIPAC Conference, when he flies in to be their guest?

The Iranian regime is of course not to everyone’s tastes, including a growing number of Iranians themselves. It has brutally cracked down on demonstrators, and cannot remain immune from the popular revolts that have taken place across the Arab World. Blair’s ludicrous intervention can only help the Iranian hardliners, which is of course what some of his critics may claim. In this I suspect they are wrong, because Blair clearly hasn’t thought this one through.

By claiming that the Iraq War has had nothing to do with the growing radicalisation of some, Tony Blair is of course engaged in the usual and predictable denial game. He would have had a point had he said it wasn’t the only factor.

Given Britain’s record in the Middle East in the last century in particular it is indeed surprising that this country is not even more disliked than it is. With the honourable exception of the self interest that led to those such as the late Captain TE Lawrence being allowed to help Arabs overthrow Ottoman tyranny, just take a quick skip through the 20th century and ask yourself: “if I was an Arab Muslim, how would I feel?

Arabs blame Britain for the Balfour Declaration and the appropriation of Palestinian land. The process is so well advanced now that barely a scattering of largely disconnected Palestinian ‘Bantustans’ remain. Throughout much of the 20th century the US and the UK used their Security Council veto repeatedly to support Israel. Both countries turned a blind eye to that country’s nuclear weapons programme. From the toppling of Mossadeq, to the invasion of Suez and the illegal war on Iraq, Britain in particular has a record to be ashamed of.  It is this long and miserable record that has helped fuel resentment, and in isolated cases, terrorism.

It was astonishing poor taste even from a man who seems to rejoice in having so little in the first place to offer his faux cures this weekend as Blair did. His was an inglorious, bloody decade in power. But he has no shame, and neither do those journalists who persist in granting him the oxygen of publicity.

This blog also appears at


  1. Gary Elsby says:

    “Iran poses no threats to Great Britain” (policies made by people we don’t know regarding the British interest).

    “Iran is bent on developing a Nuclear capability which could develop Nuclear weapons” (of mass destruction, Mark?).

    I don’t know whether there is a contradiction here, in the British Interest, of course.

    What i worry about is the anti Gaddafi sentiments which has seen an Al-Qaeda ‘known known’ installed as the Military Leader of Tripoli on behalf of the NATO backed NTC and on the CIA’s most wanted list.

    If rendition practices were on the Conservatives watch, Labour would have gone into overtime, but it wasn’t on the Conservatives watch, it was on Labour 3 terms watch.

    Britain’s Foreign policy stinks and the views of most commenters appears questionable.

  2. Peter Benson says:

    Tory Blair should be tried for War Crimes.There were no weapons of Mass Destruction.
    Many people,Doctors included feel Dr David Kelly’s Death was not suicide.
    Why did New Labour followed the USA into every major conflict since Blair took office in 97.He turned a moment in time that could have brought back real Labour policies to become a Tory.
    Anyone could have won in 97.The Tories were arrogant and people wanted change.Blair took the party in his own direction,not one the late John Smith would have chose.
    If I were a conspiracy theorist I would be asking questions about the late John Smiths death.Very convenient for Tory Blair and his New Labour Americanites who supported him and still support his policies.
    If they love the USA so much why don’t they go their.

© 2024 Left Futures | Powered by WordPress | theme originated from PrimePress by Ravi Varma