Tony Blair’s essay: "What I’ve learned"
Posted by Ellee on Jun 1, 2007 in Uncategorized | 18 comments
Tony Blair admits his 10 years in office did not turn out as expected with foreign policy taking a very high profile, as he explains in this essay published in today’s Economist entitled: “What I’ve learned“.
“Ten years ago, if you had told me I would spend a significant part of my premiership on foreign policy, I would have been surprised, a little shocked and probably, politically, somewhat alarmed. Even today, we all run for office concentrating on domestic issues.
“Foreignâ€? policy rarely wins votes, and can easily lose them. Yet nowadays the reality is increasingly that we are obliged as leaders to think, work and act internationally.”
Surely Blair could have delegated more to his Foreign Secretaries, he did not need to personally take charge of so many foreign issues. Sadly, our NHS and education system has suffered as a result.
His view on future politics is that it needs to “open up” and engage interactively on the internet, an area Labour is currently struggling with.
“Above all, political parties need to go out and seek public participation, not wait for the public to be permitted the privilege of becoming part of the sect.
So, membership should be looser, policymaking broader and more representative, the internet and interactive communication the norm. Open it all up.”
In fact, being interactive on the internet means listening and responding, not ignoring the messages if they don’t suit your agenda, like the views of thousands of people who signed the online petitions over road charging.
Blair is yesterday’s man. The only interest in him is what he may say in court, which court it will be and if he’s the one with charges to answer.
How much longer do we have to endure his departure ? His foreign policy was nothing but self-aggrandizement.
At least he now seems to realise that he needs to travel two thousand miles to find an audience that won’t jeer him – except for the phony rent-a-crowd of ‘ordinary’ supporters he selects for photo shoots.
My 100th TWQ is currently on my Journal. You are invited to list your dinner party guests.
Ellee … don’t forget to get those nominations in for the Blogpower Awards – vote early and vote often!
I think many times, leaders here in the US have a difficult time “letting go” and delegating as they attempt to carry along the way their well-intended visions. But then, the learning always comes at the end. In either event, I’m glad I’m not a politician, as the delays would drive me nuts on so many issues.
Life is about choices. TB made his and generally speaking he has restricted our opportunities for choice during his ten years in power. With Courage Brown I fear it will get even worse; Gordon really does think he knows best.
The pact that Blair/ Brown had seems to be that Brown controlled the domestic agenda with his “hidden hand” in the treasury with targets and micromanagement.
What was left to Blair? Foreign policy. So he made N. Ireland, the war on terror and the third world his own.
He has however failed – N.Ireland was well underway under the Conservatives (in fact it was Maggie’s tough stance that caused the ceasefire in the first place). He only delayed the peace by pandering to terrorists.
In regard to the war on terror – tough words, poor implementation (lying to the public is never going to end up in support for a long war, and neither is no plan for after the Iraq invasion the act of competence).
As regards Africa/ third world – he is on an ego trip that has no substance. Read my blog on this ( http://racheljoyce.blogspot.com/2007/05/blair-and-africa-failure-and-hypocrisy.html )
I have written a short essay on Blair entitled, “What I’ve Learned”
“He opens his mouth, he lies. He breathes, he lies. He lies”
Nothing original but true.
Quite.
No-one asked Blair to do most of this. The amount of foreign policy that Blair has done has been of his making. Mostly, the public put things like education, economy, health and roads as a higher priority. I suggest that he’s more interested in being seen as an international statesman than looking after the country.
Worse than that, he has rarely done much good. Darfur? His attempts at peace in Israel have gone nowhere. His negotiations over the CAP left it largely intact. Then there’s the success of Iraq.
What is it they say about: Never a prophet you shall be in your own home!
Vanity, vanity, it’s all vanity.
His farewell tour to Africa, a backslapping self-congratulatory visit to see Nelson Mandela, as if somehow he (Blair) had liberated ‘slaves’ or done away with apartheid.
Definitely lost the plot. Wake up Blair!
What have you done for Africa? – Nothing!
What have you done for Iraq? other than watch how the US destroyed its infrastructure live on CNN, setting its economy back ten years and indebting a whole generation (or two) to the US
His essay would just consist of the word ‘nothing’.
Less I say about this man the better.
Good point about the deputy leader, Ellee. It’s often true that Prime Ministers with a high international profile are useless at home. I agree it’s a lame excuse.
And of course, if Tony Blair had had a deputy leader worth his salt, he could have delegated to him much more too.
It’ s a pretty bad excuse for being a loust prime minister.
‘I would have been good, but along came foreign policy and mucked it up’.
Not convinced.
So we can look forward to tighter immigration controls, leaving the European Union, good discipline in schools and a restoration of capital punishment?
Foreign� policy rarely wins votes, and can easily lose them.
Oh I don`t know the Falklands went quite well but he does have a point in that the Liberal bleeding hearts make it almost impossible to ensure our seccurity