I follow the rants and writings of Robert Fisk. Fisk is a multiple award-winning Middle East correspondent, based in Beirut and he writes for the wonderful British paper, The Independent. Mr Fisk calls it as he sees it and he sees more than most. He is informed, thoughtful, objective and opinionated. The truth matters to Robert Fisk, as it should to all of us.
His latest commentary appeared in The Independent today, 28 May 2015, and features the a man I've been calling a war criminal for years: Tony Blair. Fisk's piece is called: Blundering Tony Blair quits as Middle East peace envoy – only Israel will miss him:
Tony Blair’s time as Middle East envoy representing the US, Russia, the UN and the EU has
finally come to an end.
Eight years after he took up the role, Blair tendered his resignation
and left one question: how come a war criminal ever became a "peace
envoy" in the first place?
The people of the Middle East – and much of the world – have been
asking this question ever since Blair was appointed the Quartet’s man in
Jerusalem, solemnly and hopelessly tasked to bring “peace” between
Israelis and Palestinians. Was his new mission supposed to wash the
blood from his hands after the catastrophe of the Bush-Blair invasion of
Iraq and the hundreds of thousands of innocents who died as a result?
For
Arabs – and for Britons who lost their loved ones in his shambolic war
in Iraq – Blair’s appointment was an insult. The man who never said he
was sorry for his political disaster simply turned up in Jerusalem four
years later and, with a team which spent millions in accommodation and
air fares, managed to accomplish absolutely nothing in the near-decade
that followed.
Blair
appeared indifferent to the massive suffering of the Palestinians – he
was clearly impotent in preventing it – and spent much of his time away
from the tragedy of the Middle East, advising the great and the good and
a clutch of Muslim dictators, and telling the world – to Israel’s
satisfaction – of the dangers represented by Iran.
The more
prescient he thought he was, the more irrelevant he became in the eyes
of the region he was sent to protect. A Blair supporter once defended
him on Channel 4 by recalling how he had travelled to the Middle East
almost 100 times – without realising the essential irony: that Blair
abandoned the region almost 100 times for more rewarding destinations.
Blair
was supposed to produce more than the easy panaceas that slipped from
his lips, the most outrageous of which was his contention that resolving
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could be easier than ending the
Northern Ireland crisis. But the Palestinians have much more in common
with the Irish Catholics cleansed from their lands by the Protestant
planters of the 17th century than with the pitiful historical battle in
the province, whose resolution proved to be Blair’s only lasting
accomplishment.
If
only he had resigned more than two years ago, after Palestinian leaders
had themselves characterised his job as "useless, useless, useless." Israel, of course, would never have described him as this. Stoutly
condemning the campaign for Israel’s "delegitimisation," Blair talked
about this as a form of bias which was "an affront to humanity" – a
choice of words he never used about the massive civilian casualties
inflicted by Israel on the Palestinians of Gaza.
The Arabs will
now wait to see if the Quartet will repeat its folly by appointing an
even more unsuitable candidate – a truly difficult task – although many
in the region think the whole panjandrum must be abandoned. Eight years
ago, there just might have been the slimmest chance of bringing a
Palestinian state into being. Today there is none.
And doesn't that say it all? Good riddance Tony Blair.