Tony Blair - Butcher of Iraq and ‘Peace’ Envoy

Before I elaborate my viewpoint on this matter, I ask the following questions: under the current climate, will my viewpoint be considered as a legitimate expression of free speech or evidence of radicalisation? Will I get a knock on the door from the Liberal Inquisition brigade? Indeed, critical analysis of the government’s domestic and foreign policy should be at heart of free speech, a pillar of democracy; it is a way of holding the government accountable, and thus serves a legitimate purpose. This is far removed from those advocating hate speech disguised as free-speech, by drawing needless, offensive cartoons that convey insults, fulfilling the crude urges of rightwing xenophobic bigots.

After eight years, Tony Blair’s time as Middle East Envoy, representing the Quartet (the US, Russia, the UN and the EU), has finally come to an end. Robert Fisk asks, in the Independent Newspaper, how a war criminal ever became a ‘peace envoy’ in the first place. His appointment to this role was an insult to many. Perhaps Blair thought this would serve as adequate redemption for his sins during his war criminal years, and he certainly has blood on his hands.

His resignation hit the news headlines, but was meaningless piece of information to the vast majority, because who really noticed Blair playing such a role in the first place? A reporter for Channel 4 News asked the common people in Gaza to identify his photo. Many did not recognise him, and the ones who did described him as a pro-Israeli butcher of Iraq. Such is the reputation of ex-Peace Envoy Blair. A common question posed by man is why he is walking around as a freeman instead of facing war crimes charges at The Hague, after he raped Iraq under false pretext of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction).

For sure the invasion of the impoverished Iraq also bolstered Israel’s security; it was a bloodthirsty show of dominance for Israel. Handing the role of peacemaker to such a man as the warmongering Tony Blair was dooming it to obvious failure. One of the acid tests of an impartial peace broker is that he will attract complaints and criticism from both sides, but in Blair’s case, the complaints only ever came from the Arabs. That was not surprising, given his speech on various matters. Accordingly, he was always quick to denounce the Arab Muslims, while maintaining a staunchly supportive silence as Israel committed atrocities in Gaza. We can all recall his vocal opposition against Iran, which delighted Israel. And who could forget his infamous remark, that Muslims have a false sense of grievance, that they are imagining it all, and that they must expose themselves to a different narrative. In doing this, Blair only regurgitates the propaganda of the Right-Wing Neoconservatives. His beliefs and actions contradict the role of an impartial peacemaker between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Over the years, did Mr Blair, as Peace Envoy, managed to make a passing comment on Israel’s defying of International Law, building settlements in occupied territories. In the same breath, he denounced Iraq for the alleged violation of UN resolutions. But did he once utter a word of the Israeli massacres in Gaza, when people around world could see the disproportionate Israeli reaction and the casualties on the ground, many of whom were young children?

Whether we like it or not, bringing peace to the region means restraining Israel to the oh-so-famous Two-State Solution, as the defenceless Palestinian are in a position only to react to creeping suffocation and annexation of their lands. The fact is that Israel is still expanding its borders in extremely aggressive ways. Not once has Blair called on Israel to restrain itself; his recipe for ‘peace’ has always meant pandering to the Israeli leadership by delivering the Israeli terms to the Palestinians.

I am still perplexed as to how he became the leader of a socialist party, and ended up siding with a Right-Wing Neoconservative cabal to wage this horrendous war that has unleashed so much chaos in the region. Far from being a peacemaker, he stands as the Cecil Rhodes of our time. He harvested the blood of the Iraqis and become very wealthy in the process, and he has done all of this shamelessly in the name of peace.

Yamin Zakaria (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)

Published 30/05/2015

London, UK

Last modified on Saturday, 30 May 2015 22:36

Login to post comments