Why I Still Like Tony Blair

Tom Brokaw interviewed Tony Blair last week. And while I still vehemently disagree with his and George Bush's foreign policy, I have respect for the man, who is intelligent, eloquent, and either extremely candid or better than any American politician at playing to cynicism and mistrust. And you have to like anybody whose answers can put Tom Brokaw to shame.
Blair's arguments, even for exactly the same things, seem calm, collected, and rational in comparison to the U.S. policy, and I suspect that, if not for the polarizing language coming from our own nation, Tony Blair would have been able to solidly convince the world to support the operation in Iraq.

Compare, for instance, these two quotes, one from George Bush's press conference and one from Tony Blair's interview, about why the June 30th deadline is important:

Bush: "It is important that we meet that deadline. As a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation -- and neither does America. We're not an imperial power, as nations such as Japan and Germany can attest. We are a liberating power, as nations in Europe and Asia can attest, as well. America's objective in Iraq is limited, and it is firm: We seek an independent, free and secure Iraq."

Blair: "What they are trying to do is to provoke a situation in which there is such chaos that they can tip the country into general disorder. Now one element that they are trying to use in that is obviously to say, 'This is an occupation. The Americans and British wish to stay there. They wish not to hand over power to the Iraqis.' And therefore the political timetable and the transition, a transition to Iraqi sovereignty is actually an important condition of creating the right circumstances for security."

Notice the differences between the two -- While Bush reiterates his statement of why we are there and what we are doing, Blair actually backs up the claim. Bush's asserts, with no explanation, context, or relation to the question, that "we seek an independent, free, and secure Iraq," without relating it to the issue, or explaining it at all. He states a general consensus, without ever explaining how he plans to pursue it. We know his goals, but he still hasn't explained why his actions support the goal. Meanwhile, Blair's answer appears to actually have some thought behind it. It's logical and thought out, and it makes sense. In roughly the same amount of time, Bush spoke himself around in circles to explain what the goal was (which, of course, we already knew), while Blair not only established the goal, but laid out clearly and logically why this plan is the way to meet that goal.

Ironic, when you consider that it was Bush's team that came up with the plan in the first place.

I also found this quote from near the end of Blair's interview interesting. When asked if he thought he had made any mistakes, he said:

"You know, every time I am asked this question by the British press I say that that's for me to know and you guys to find out. I don't doubt that when people look back they'll say there could have been certain things done differently. Things take unexpected turns. But I don't think there's a great deal of point in dwelling on that.

"What we've got to dwell on at the moment is getting the job done. Making sure we've got the right political and military strategy to see it through and to get it done. And we will. And this is not easy. It's an uneasy struggle to be engaged in. But we're engaged in it, we must see it through."

Now, this is where Blair has a unique capability that George Bush lacked. While the president at his press conference spent five minutes "trying" to come up with a mistake he had made, Blair simply stated, in what is either admirable candor or a skillful play to cynicism, that he did not want to admit his mistakes, and moved on to very eloquently explain why.

It's actually a shame that most of the TV news programs cut that second paragraph off, though, because, despite my opposition to the Iraq war, that is a statement I wholeheartedly agree with. It's the one that too many staunch anti-war activists ignore -- that you can't just, in the middle of a conflict, say "Okay, stop." We do have to finish it. And I think most of the country, pro- or anti-war would agree. That's the way to unite people.

So, as I said at the beginning of this article, I have much respect for Tony Blair. But, as someone opposed to the Iraq war, I am glad there was someone like George W. Bush in on the plan, because if Blair had been leading this horse alone, I believe that I, along with most of the world, would have been much too tempted to follow.

No Comments! Be brave and leave the first one!:

Name:
Email:
URL:
Comment:			/ Textile
Enter this code:
( Register your username / Log inChange Settings for )
Notify:		Yes, send me email when someone replies.
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.