Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

52 EX-DIPLOMATS SLAM BLAIR MID-EAST POLICY

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-04 09:54 PM
Original message
52 EX-DIPLOMATS SLAM BLAIR MID-EAST POLICY
52 EX-DIPLOMATS SLAM BLAIR MID-EAST POLICY

Apr 27 2004


By Bob Roberts Political Correspondent


TONY Blair's strategy on Iraq and Israel was attacked last night by 52 former diplomats.

In an unprecedented letter to the Prime Minister, they said Britain was following a US Middle East policy which was "doomed to failure".

They added that the US and British actions in Iraq were disgraceful and naive.

And they said they were "dismayed" at Blair's backing for an Israeli peace plan.

The man behind the letter, Oliver Miles, a former ambassador to Greece, said: "Never has Government policy been so controversial.....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14184422&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=52-ex-diplomats-slam-blair-mid-east-policy-name_page.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-04 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Amazing. Just amazing. He's like some kind of animal taking
hits but still moving. How many arrows can he sustain before he tips over?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-04 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Here is the letter
Doomed to failure in the Middle East

A letter from 52 former senior British diplomats to Tony Blair

Tuesday April 27, 2004
The Guardian

Dear Prime Minister,

We the undersigned former British ambassadors, high commissioners, governors and senior international officials, including some who have long experience of the Middle East and others whose experience is elsewhere, have watched with deepening concern the policies which you have followed on the Arab-Israel problem and Iraq, in close cooperation with the United States. Following the press conference in Washington at which you and President Bush restated these policies, we feel the time has come to make our anxieties public, in the hope that they will be addressed in parliament and will lead to a fundamental reassessment.

The decision by the US, the EU, Russia and the UN to launch a "road map" for the settlement of the Israel/Palestine conflict raised hopes that the major powers would at last make a determined and collective effort to resolve a problem which, more than any other, has for decades poisoned relations between the west and the Islamic and Arab worlds. The legal and political principles on which such a settlement would be based were well established: President Clinton had grappled with the problem during his presidency; the ingredients needed for a settlement were well understood and informal agreements on several of them had already been achieved. But the hopes were ill-founded. Nothing effective has been done either to move the negotiations forward or to curb the violence. Britain and the other sponsors of the road map merely waited on American leadership, but waited in vain.

Worse was to come. After all those wasted months, the international community has now been confronted with the announcement by Ariel Sharon and President Bush of new policies which are one-sided and illegal and which will cost yet more Israeli and Palestinian blood. Our dismay at this backward step is heightened by the fact that you yourself seem to have endorsed it, abandoning the principles which for nearly four decades have guided international efforts to restore peace in the Holy Land and which have been the basis for such successes as those efforts have produced.

This abandonment of principle comes at a time when rightly or wrongly we are portrayed throughout the Arab and Muslim world as partners in an illegal and brutal occupation in Iraq.

The conduct of the war in Iraq has made it clear that there was no effective plan for the post-Saddam settlement. All those with experience of the area predicted that the occupation of Iraq by the coalition forces would meet serious and stubborn resistance, as has proved to be the case. To describe the resistance as led by terrorists, fanatics and foreigners is neither convincing nor helpful. Policy must take account of the nature and history of Iraq, the most complex country in the region. However much Iraqis may yearn for a democratic society, the belief that one could now be created by the coalition is naive. This is the view of virtually all independent specialists on the region, both in Britain and in America. We are glad to note that you and the president have welcomed the proposals outlined by Lakhdar Brahimi. We must be ready to provide what support he requests, and to give authority to the UN to work with the Iraqis themselves, including those who are now actively resisting the occupation, to clear up the mess......

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/comment/0,11538,1204208,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philestine Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-04 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
3. Nail in the coffin
Of all the critiques and negative assessments I have read of Tony Blair's stewardship, I think this is probably the most condemning.

The experiences of these individuals in foreign policy makes their advice on Iraq worth listening too. It also makes that letter a real hot potato.

In the UK, a lot of the 'official' criticism over Blair and Iraq comes from the shadow cabinet, or from the media. Either way, it is often very much perceived as opinion. This letter seems like the voice of a neutral authority. Bet it's about as welcome to Labour as a big ice-cube to the Titanic, except perhaps for Gordon Brown (texture like sun).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-04 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
4. Blair should listen to the experts
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1079420660764

<snip>

"In possibly the most stinging rebuke ever to a British government by its foreign policy establishment, 52 former ambassadors and international officials have written to Tony Blair telling him he is damaging UK (and western) interests by backing George W. Bush's misguided policies in the Middle East. It would be comforting to imagine that their comments will be heeded.


The signatories to the letter include many distinguished and experienced public servants. They extend beyond the "usual suspects" of well-known Arabists, and there is every indication that many more serving and retired diplomats, as well as army officers, harbour the same misgivings.

In any case, the notion that so-called Arabists - expert in the language, culture and politics of Arab countries - should be excluded from policy because of their alleged predilection to "go native" should be discredited by the way the Pentagon, which shut out anyone with actual knowledge of Iraq, has serially bungled the occupation."

<snip>

"The diplomats were shocked into action not just by gathering signs of implosion in Iraq but by US backing for the decision of Ariel Sharon, Israeli prime minister, to keep most Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank - and Mr Blair's endorsement of this "one-sided and illegal" new policy. Downing Street insists it has not abandoned the principle of a two-state solution in Israel-Palestine and the internationally underwritten "roadmap" to it. But Mr Sharon's strategy tramples on several United Nations Security Council resolutions, and Washington and London's support for it has inflamed Arab opinion to the point where it sees Palestine and Iraq as two fronts in a war of resistance against the west - the optimal outcome for the fanatics who follow Osama bin Laden."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sushi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-29-04 01:58 AM
Response to Original message
5. Bliar is finished
I wonder who is first to leave, Bliar, Bush, or Sharon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC