Posted 4:13 pm by BOTE
Tony on his way out?

Tony Blairs hold on power seems to be slipping away. The core of his problem is his unquestioning support of George W.'s war against Iraq. He has been strutting around the world in an attempt to carve out a role as mediator between the US and the rest of the world. All the while many British voters have watched with growing unease as their prime minister repeatedly caved in to US demands when he had made highly public statements advocating an alternative strategy. The UN resolution fiasco is the most glaring example of this obseqious behaviour.

Tony clearly decided that the war was worth fighting and believed he could exert sufficient influence in Washington to make it appear that he was a partner in the process and so reap the political benefits at home. What he didn't seem to realise was how little the 'special relationship' between Washington and London meant to George W. and how little real influence he would have. Blair has found himself in the unenviable position of being ridiculed in the media and the capitals of Europe for being Washingtons errand boy. The worrying thing for Blair is that there is more than a little truth to this.

The inability to find any weapons of mass destruction following the successful conclusion of hostilities has only reinforced the perception that Washington had an unspoken agenda in Iraq that had little to do with making the world safer.

This strategic blunder has, for the first time, created an opportunity for vocal public dissent from within his own party. Even his partner and ally in the creation of New Labour, Gordon Brown, appears to have decided that now is the time to weaken Blair. Gordon's protogee Clair Short delivered an impassioned resignation speech to the Commons that was none too complimentary to Tony Blair. Gordon himself has chosen to distance himself from the Prime Minister on the Euro issue, widening the rift between the Prime Minister and the rest of the party. The performance of the Labour Party in council elections has not helped, providing a much needed lifeline to the Conservatives who for the first time in years may actually be perceived as electable. The beginning of the end for Mr Blair?

Posted 9:58 pm by BOTE
9/11 was a tragedy. This much is clear. The senseless death of so many innocents was profoundly traumatising for Americans and indeed for much of the world. The people of America felt angry, frightened and helpless. They wanted those responsible brought to justice. The initial reaction of President Bush struck a chord (after he got over his initial stagefright), he projected a grim determination to punish those responsible.

Almost two years later what has been achieved?. The ringleaders have escaped the best efforts of the US government to seek them out. It is true that some senior Taliban members have been apprehended but this is scant consolation to those who have lost relatives and friends in New York. Afghanistan has been prised from the grip of the Taliban but is fast returning to the chaos of the pre-Taliban era. Yesterdays news in Washington, Afghanistan is seeing warlords reasserting control of the regions, the drug business (quashed under the Taliban) flourishing once more and intelligence sources have pointed to signs of a resurgent Taliban organisation. The blatant neglect of its responsibilities towards its first 'liberation' target does not augur well for the future in Iraq. The nascent government of Afghanistan lacks the necessary resources to establish control over the country and the resulting power vacuum is allowing competing centres of power to emerge and undermine what little has been achieved.

Alas no one, it seems, cares. Least of all the US administration that is directly responsible for this situation. Instead of focusing resources on establishing a functioning democratic state in Afghanistan, George W Bush used his favourite bait and switch trick. He deftly substituted the easily achievable goal of conquering Iraq for the profoundly more difficult goal of stabilising Afghanistan. This had the added benefit of allowing the administration to neatly sidestep its inability to apprehend Bin Laden and his consorts.

The invasion of Iraq was an inevitable success. US ground forces overwhelmed the demoralised and poorly equipped Iraqi army in three weeks. The superiority of US equipment, tactics and training made this a foregone conclusion (despite media attempts to portray the outcome as uncertain). The justification for the invasion remains spectacularly unconvincing. How is it that this regime that was a clear and present danger to the Western world crumbled so readily? Where are the weapons of mass destruction? If they existed why didn't Saddam use them against US forces?

The truth is that Iraq was the achievable goal. It allows George W. to present himself as the successful 'Commander in Chief' and the deflect criticism about his failures in the fight against terror and his partisan domestic economic policies. Democrats have been tearing their hair out while waiting for public focus to return to domestic issues where they can attack the Republican platform.

The American public is slowly realising that the victory in Iraq did not make the world safer for them, if anything the opposite. The US is now an occupying power in a country where sentiment is becoming more and more hostile towards the US. Why? Because the Bush administration has failed to establish order and get the country back on its feet. Iraqis are now worse off, in terms of basic needs, than they were under Saddams regime. This failure is feeding increasing resentment, and as any Hezbollah recruiter will tell you, this is a fertile ground for the kind of fanaticism that led to 9/11. If Afghanistan is the proto-Iraq, then the situation is not likely to improve anytime soon.

George W. Bush has left a trail of broken states in his wake in his quest to remain electable while pursing his partisan agenda at home. The view that the middle eastern intervention is motivated by an effort to make the world safer for Americans is not credible. If that were the case then Afghanistan would have received the effort required to give it a chance of success. This is a hard nosed effort to prolong a 'neo-conservative' right wing administration in power. The question is how far will he go? Will he go after Syria or Iran next? There are elements of his administration that want to do just that. Stories about money and fugitives fleeing to Syria towards the end of the war turned out to be mostly fiction but worryingly could have been used as justification for military action (although this would have been political suicide for Blair). The glow of success from Iraq is fading fast. Al Qaeda seems to be resurgent, casting a harsh light on the inadequacies of the administration in the fight against terror. Does George need another war?