What's in It for Blair???

T.Hartin t.hartin at qmul.ac.uk
Tue Mar 11 02:43:25 MST 2003

I actually think Blair is trapped. It is extremely difficult for him to
change his position now. He desparately needs the second UN resolution -
not so much for the US's sake or the "US/UK special relationship" but for
his own political future.

I reckon Blair started out on this venture because

(a) wanted to prove his credibility to the ruling class - i.e Tory who
tamed the Labour Party
(b) thought the script would pretty much go as it did in the Gulf War
last time (early 90s)
(c) is used to pushing around the Labour Party and getting his way.

and perhaps
(d) thought the war would be a nice diversion from his growing
unpopularity around privatisation

Despite their cravenness Labour MPs are starting to rebel in bigger
numbers. And will do so even further if Blair starts to look weaker.
The demo of 15 February was a real earthquake here - and the followup
actions will put the pressure on even more. The Labour Party may seriously
start thinking about its electoral future and bring the long knives out of
the cupboard.

Tony H

>On Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 03:48:37 -0500
>Yoshie wrote:

>It makes sense that the Bush junta believed it's in their interest to
>invade Iraq, thought and still think that they can get away with it,
>and believe that they can't back down now without losing
>What doesn't make sense at all is Blair's continuing devotion to the
>Bush project -- especially at this point when it's become clear that
>it's the most unpopular war in history and he's facing revolts from
>his party and cabinet even.  What's in it for Blair???
>Without the UN SC mandate for the war, Blair has nothing to gain by
>going along with Bush and probably a lot to lose given UK public
>opinions, _even if_ the coalition of the willy-nilly manage to go to
>war without the UN and conquer all of Iraq relatively quickly.

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list