In the Agora: Blair as a Lesson for America

« Irony | Main | Fishing for stories that don't exist »

June 28, 2007

Blair as a Lesson for America

In a final farewell essay published in a recent edition of The Economist, Tony Blair wrote the following:

In this age, foreign policy is not an interesting distraction from the hard slog of domestic reform. It is the element that describes a nation's face to the world at large, forms the perceptions of others to it and, in part, its perception of itself.

We all talk of interdependence being the defining characteristic of the modern world. But often we fail to see the fundamental implications of such a statement. It means we have a clear self-interest as a nation in what happens the world over. And because mass media and communication convey powerful images in an instant across the globe, it dictates that struggles are fought as much through propaganda, ideas and values as through conventional means, military or diplomatic.

In just two paragraphs Blair demonstrates why he was such a successful, artful leader. But it also stands in stark contrast to America's current leadership and its apparent understanding of what is necessary to win the so-called "war on terror".

As Tony Blair exits the world stage, at least as the leader of America's closest friend, I reflect most upon an imbalance created by the loss of his perspective outlined above. By failing to grasp it, Bush has turned the world away from America and, worse, a critically important truth he essentially got right - radical Islamicism poses a dangerous threat to Western civilization.

President Bush's glaring failures are painfully evident when he's side-by-side Blair. As Blair understands far better than Bush, "terrorism" as it is now understood will only be defeated through a battle of ideas fought in a mass media battlefield. Mr. Blair put it this way: "We should condemn not just their barbaric methods of terrorism, but in particular their presumed sense of grievance against the West."

I have never fully supported the military war in Iraq. But what I have always supported is a war of values whereby we attack the ideology of radical Islamicists head-on and with confidence. Tony Blair was as deft a soldier as any in this war of values. For that he will be missed. Let us hope that his leadership will be followed not only by his successors in Britain, but by Bush's successors here at home.

Posted by Joshua Claybourn at June 28, 2007 12:19 AM

Comments

"We should condemn not just their barbaric methods of terrorism, but in particular their presumed sense of grievance against the West."

Considering that Richard Lugar still advocates (1. below) a "sustainable" American military presence in Iraq, in part to "protect oil flows" employing "temporary or permanent military bases;" that America (2. below) intentionally foments civil war in places like Gaza by "training, funding, and arming Fatah thugs and inserting them into Gaza" to destabilize a democratically elected government, I would say that Blair may have gotten the "critically important truth" slightly backwards: it is American imperialism that poses a dangerous threat to Middle Eastern stability.

Furthermore, this notion of a "radical Islamic threat" is simply a convenient construct for neo neo-cons to push their ME agenda. Al Qaeda is not Hamas is not the Muslim Brotherhood is not Hizbollah. These are all distinct groups with distinct agendas. Lumping them all together into one big "terror threat" is stupid and counter-productive, and until we get out of that mindset, America will continue to fail in the Middle East.

(1.) http://lugar.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=277751&&year=2007&

(2.)
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=143

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2007/06/nir-rosen-on-cn.html

Posted by: JohnS at June 28, 2007 09:05 AM | permalink

Good post, Josh. I tend to agree with everything Blair says about international relations.

Posted by: Chuck at June 28, 2007 11:41 AM | permalink

it dictates that struggles are fought as much through propaganda, ideas and values as through conventional means, military or diplomatic.

I would find it easier to sympathize with your sense of loss over Blair's exit if you could at least acknowledge that our Mr Bush should not have had to engage in propaganda warfare against the jihadists AND the New York Times. I'm not sure the most eloquent and media savvy presidents in our history (whoever they would be - too darned few) would have fared any better against the ferocious lies and personal attacks starting with Micheal Moore, through NSA "Domestic" wiretapping and Wilson/Plame through to 30 months for Scooter Libby over inabiblity to recall events. All of these issues (and many others), whether directly the responsiblity of the administration or not, were manufactured soley for the purpose of anchoring doubt in Bush and even the American purpose and lifestyle.

We should have known what was coming from the very beginning, when the broadcast networks revealed that they would not support any notion of American patriotism in their programs.

If you ask me, the feds should have shut the NYT down when they exposed the feds techniques for tracing terrorist funding.

June 28, 2007

Blair as a Lesson for America

Comments

Post a comment