OneWorld.net (U.S.)

By Jan Oberg

Well, Robert Fisk has said it much better than I ever could in an article here: http://www.transnational.org/Area_MiddleEast/2007/Features.html (scroll left column)

"How could Blair possibly get this job? I remain overwhelmed that this vain, deceitful man, this proven liar, a trumped-up lawyer who has the blood of thousands of Arab men, women and children on his hands is really contemplating being "our" Middle East envoy." http://www.counterpunch.org/fisk06232007.html

Here are some of my answers to how on earth Blair could get that job:

1. Literally no one among the top leaders of the international "community" has any professional training or personal understanding of conflict-resolution, reconciliation and peace - so, take what you have. The appointment of Blair is revealing of the intellectual and moral poverty of leaders is mind-boggling.

2. Western leaders who have violated international law, who could be indicted for war crimes and who have consistently lied to the world either keep their positions or get promoted - e.g. Blair, Clinton, Albright, Fogh Rasmussen, Javier Solana, Wesley Clark, Bush...

3. Ban Ki-moon, the new Secretary-General of the UN, one of the "Quartet", regrettably has accepted (or been forced to accept) a many consider to be a non-convicted war criminal as his envoy - meaning he lacks civil courage.

4. The West no longer has a sense of history - the UK, like the US, being among the world's least fit countries to mediate in the Middle East.

5. The West, including Russia of course, by definition always does right and might is right.

6. The West cares only about the elites. Diplomats and commentators all over the place agree that Blair is a guy government leaders will meet while he is loathed by citizens throughout the Arab world and Iran. But who cares about that?

7. Spin, charisma, deceit and the marketing of a policy today is much more important than knowledge, decency, ethics and the quality content of policy - and mainstream media reflect the power that be.

8. The West has no sensitivity, no sense of shame and no ability to deeply empathize with anybody outside its own countries; otherwise it would not humiliate the feelings of millions by making non-convicted war criminal Blair its envoy. It would rather have arrested him.

9. Blair not only "did" Iraq, he also "did" Serbia-Kosovo. Remember that he stood by that NATO crime by explaining that he had not had all the facts and had not read all the books but "I thought we had a good case." That sort of argument is enough to get away with it!

So I regret to tell you, Mr Ban-Ki moon, Mr. Bush, Mr. Putin and Mr Solana - that as one among "we the peoples of the United Nations" I want you to know that Tony Blair is not my envoy.

I wonder only about this: Through which international - globalized - democratic procedures was this man offered this terribly important job? And in competition with whom was his qualifications judged to be the best for all of us and for peace in the Middle East - apart from his charisma, of course?

Lots of thought-provoking stuff about the Middle East by TFF Associates here http://www.transnational.org/Area_Index_MiddleEast.htm

- and by some of the world's eminent scholars and journalists here http://www.transnational.org/Area_MiddleEast/2007/Features.html