As more people add their opinions on Tony Blair’s possible rise to the presidency of Europe, it is worth remembering that rumours linking him to the role have been around since the days he was still sat in the Downing St hot seat. In fact, he was being confronted with them during the UK’s last presidency of the EU back in 2005, by none other than UKIP’s all action leader, Nigel Farage.
Last month, I went along to a debate on the EU organised by the Labour-affiliated Fabian Society. Nigel was on the panel, along with the likes of the Guardian’s Polly Toynbee. Needless to say, it was a tough crowd for Nigel. But he came out swinging by saying he was planning to bring a motion against every single EU commissioner accusing them of “not doing their jobs”. I thought that Open House readers should have a chance of seeing Nigel in full flow too, and taking on our former Prime Minister and possible future President in the process.
Bliar is clearly unfit for any future public office, and should be blocked from any role with the EU. His forthcoming trial for war crimes should debar him from any such EU position in any case.
Posted by: Neil McGowan | Wednesday, 13 February 2008 at 06:04 PM
When will the war crimes trial of Blair begin? Will he stand in the docket alone, or will others promoting the invasion of Iraq join him?
Posted by: Floyd Rudmin | Wednesday, 13 February 2008 at 07:05 PM
When will the war crimes trial of Blair begin? Will he stand in the docket alone, or will others promoting the invasion of Iraq join him?
Posted by: Floyd Rudmin | Wednesday, 13 February 2008 at 07:06 PM
Tony Blair, in spite of all the blather from all sides in the British and European press, is perfect for the role of EU President. He was 'pro-EU' back in the days when his party was at best ambivalent, and he fought to integrate the UK fully into continental discussions of many issues. He also fought to keep sense in the process, not allowing European economic entanglements to compromise UK sovereignty over key concerns.
And can we put to rest this risible stuff on Blair being a 'war criminal'?? Please learn some history, ladies. PM Blair did what he could with an awful situation under the tyrant Hussein; and the world's press was unanimous (the entire year prior to the joint invasion) that Saddam did indeed have WMDs. That these have never been found does not disallow the sound reasoning that lead to the invasion. NATO was chicken-shit, but what else is new under the sun....
Meanwhile, things in Iraq are slowly coming under some control. Why pundits believe this war, of any war, was going to be over in a couple months, is beyond me.
Go, Tony Blair. You're a sound politician and a dedicated public servant and you ought to be given a go at defining this new role of EU President.
Posted by: E L Holmes | Wednesday, 13 February 2008 at 11:21 PM
I want to be able to place something here of proper relevance. Especially when sending from Washington D.C. and being involved in politics with news and information. But wars crimes against Tony Blair, the former prime minister of Great Britain, oh please! Was he sneaking out in the middle of the night, dashing out over to the middle east and chopping heads of terrorists? The next you folks over there will be coming up with is that Tony Blair was seeing the new wife of the current 2008 French prime minister. If you folks over there are going to continually come up with hog wash as true fact, then what the heck, go all the way! Why stop with war crimes?
Posted by: Patrick Stevens | Thursday, 14 February 2008 at 09:24 AM
Leaving aside Mr Blair's capacity for deluding himself & others (WMD in Iraq?), Blair's presidential style would not work in the EU where consensus-building are essential.
Can't he just go away & play at elder statesman on the speaking circuit?
Posted by: Porrompompero | Thursday, 14 February 2008 at 12:29 PM
I always thought that the UKIP were a bit of a joke, but Farage comes across in that video as unexpectedly impressive. He makes some telling points about the EU and about Blair's deeply feeble record regarding its reform. Blair must be quite glad he never had to face Farage across the dispatch box!
Posted by: Malcolm Innes | Friday, 15 February 2008 at 01:55 AM
it is certainly not hogwash to envisage Blair as a war criminal. Iraq was a sovereign state that showed no immediate hostile intent to the countries by whom it was invaded. Inasfar as it is relevant it did not support El Quaida and had rebuffed Osama Bin Laden`s advances. There was no UN resolution to sanction the invasion and as far as WMD are concerned, the UN expert had concluded that therewas scant evidence of their possession by Saddam Hussein. Since the invasion Blair has touted his folksy notion of liberal intervention around the talking shops of Europe knowing that it is the only basis upon which the war in Iraq could be founded and supported by enlightened opinion. No, the invasion was undoubtedly a war crime, a fact upon which the overwhelming majority of lawyers agree. I say this as a former lawyer in the British Army.
Posted by: robert collins | Tuesday, 26 February 2008 at 03:42 PM