|
FIFTY, LONG, UNNECESSARY
YEARS OF DEPRESSION
"You have to understand, that, in Britain,
people have been unhappy and angry, for the past 50 years, but protest
has been crushed, like with the miners'
strikes of the 1970s,
sometimes using very subtle methods."
http://www.rense.com/general34/MAVE.HTM
Brits Move To Dump Blair
By Mark Burdman
Executive Intelligence
Review
www.LaRouchePub.com/eiw
2-18-2003
After a day, Feb. 15, which
saw the largest political demonstration ever in London, with two
million marchers protesting plans for a war in Iraq, and with tens of
thousands marching in Glasgow and Belfast, moves gathered pace, among
leading circles in the ruling Labour Party and elsewhere, for
British Prime Minister Tony Blair to be dumped, as soon as that can
be arranged.
With all
signs pointing to the Bush Administration
being fully committed to an Iraq war, in the
weeks immediately ahead, the dumping of
Blair, the Administration's main ally for
the war drive, might well be the one
qualitative event, that would knock the war
off course.
Blair is reeling, not only from the mass
demonstrations inside Britain, but from his
isolation, in the international
political-diplomatic arena. On Feb. 14,
nations representing a large percentage of
humanity, spoke out during the United
Nations Security Council debate that
followed the report by chief U.N. weapons
inspector Hans Blix -- a report that,
itself, was a slap in the face to Washington
and London -- against a rush to war against
Iraq. Then, on Feb. 17, the insistence by
Blair and his Foreign Secretary Jack Straw,
for an overt threat of short-term war
against Iraq was rejected by European Union
leaders, at an emergency EU summit called by
Greece, the country currently occupying the
rotating EU Presidency.
Blair returned to Britain, with his tail
between his legs. He tried to downplay the
war rhetoric, during a Feb. 18 press
conference, insisting that "there is no rush
to war," while sources close to him claimed,
on that day, that he would be having a
private audience with Pope John Paul II, on
Feb. 22. This may be an attempt by Blair to
soften his image, but it is questionable,
whether even the Holy Father could redeem
this corrupted soul. "TONY BLAIR IS
FINISHED"
That there are significant efforts in
motion, to get rid of him, was confirmed,
during a Feb. 16 discussion with Executive
Intelligence Review (EIR), by Tam Dalyell,
the longest-serving member of the House of
Commons (known in Britain as the "Father of
the House of Commons"), and the most
courageous fighter, against this immoral
imperial war. Dalyell's efforts have been
highlighted, in recent editions of EIR.
He had attended the spring conference of the
Labour Party, in Glasgow, Scotland, on Feb.
15, where Blair had cowardly escaped the
70,000 antiwar demonstrators who had
gathered there (see accompanying article).
Dalyell proclaimed: "The new situation is,
that there are serious people, who are
serious about dumping Tony Blair. A lot of
people want him out." He added the
qualification, that the complexity of
inner-Labour Party rules made this somewhat
problematic, technically speaking, but
stressed that the desire and intent to get
rid of Blair is growing qualitatively,
within Labour ranks.
This was confirmed, the next day, by British
Labour parliamentarian Alice Mahon,
Dalyell's closest collaborator in antiwar
efforts, within the House of Commons. She
was quoted, on the front-page of the Feb. 17
London Guardian, insisting that a leadership
challenge to Blair will be mounted, within
Labour, if he refuses to allow more time for
weapons inspections in Iraq, and insists on
rushing to war: "Yes, of course, people are
talking. There's no point in denying that."
Then, on Feb. 18, the Labour-linked London
Daily Mirror, ran a strongly worded article,
by Whitehall Editor Paul Gilfeather, under
the headline, "We'll Oust Blair", with a
sub-headline that "MPs [Members of
Parliament--ed.] plot an antiwar revolt to
topple Prime Minister: 'He Won't Listen, He
Must Go.'"
Gilfeather stated: "Tony Blair faces a
leadership challenge over his plans to
attack Iraq. The Daily Mirror has learned of
a plot involving disillusioned MPs, peers
[Members of the House of Lords --ed.] and
union bosses. It would be the first such
move against the Premier since he swept to
power in 1997. One ringleader said, 'These
are firm proposals.'"
The Mirror went on: "The Labour MP, who
asked not to be named, added: 'We have the
numbers required to mount a challenge. It is
now a firm view right across the Labour
Party, that Tony Blair is finished, because
of his refusal to listen to overwhelming
opposition to war with Iraq.'"
Tony Woodley, deputy general secretary of
the Transport and General Workers Union
(TGWU), told the Mirror: "Mr. Blair's in
real trouble here."
The Mirror article was accompanied by a
photo of a goggle-eyed Blair, with the
caption, "FINISHED? Wild-eyed Blair insists
he'll follow George Bush to war."
Further adding insult to the Prime Minister,
the lead front-page article of the
Labour-linked Guardian, on Feb. 18, had a
banner headline, "Blair's Popularity
Plummets". The article noted that newest
poll results show "a rift between Tony Blair
and the public over war against Iraq". Blair
"has sustained significant political damage"
from the Iraq debate, and "his personal
rating has dropped through the floor."
Support for the war has fallen to 29%, the
lowest since these kinds of polls began to
be taken, in August 2002. "THE IRAQ ISSUE IS
A CATALYST"
Even more precarious for Blair, is the
reality, that the demonstrations of Feb. 15
express much more, than only opposition to a
war against Iraq, as important as that issue
is. The rotten, lying, and "spin"-laden
moves by the Blair government respecting
Iraq, as well as the extremely bellicose
threats and unqualified support for a most
dubious American Administration, have become
emblematic, for millions of Britons, of a
deeper rottenness, characterizing
present-day Great Britain.
The point was made by a leading British
social-psychology expert, in a background
discussion with EIR, on Feb. 17. He stated:
"Not since the [night of Aug. 31-Sept. 1,
1997] death of Princess Diana, and the
funerals and mass outpourings of deep
emotion and anger at established
institutions that Britain saw then, has
anything been seen here, like we are seeing
now, with the mass protests against an Iraq
war."
He stressed:
"You have to understand,
that the Iraq issue is primarily a CATALYST,
for something much bigger. There is the
EXTERNAL reality, respecting the danger of
war, but there is the crucial INTERNAL
reality, that much of Britain is COLLAPSING.
The health system is a disaster, the road
and rail infrastructure is a disaster. So,
what you have, with the Iraq issue, is a
DOUBLE PROTEST: the OVERT protest, against a
war, and the COVERT protest, against the
state of Britain."
The expert went on: "You have to understand,
that, in Britain, people have been unhappy
and angry, for the past 50 years, but
protest has been crushed, like with the
miners' strikes of the 1970s, sometimes
using very subtle methods. But now, this
buildup of internal protest, is finding an
expression, through the Iraq issue. And this
time, the protest, because of the massive
presence of mainstream 'Middle England'
protesters who are peaceful people, cannot
be dispersed by force, or related methods.
Were the government now to do something like
that, it would seem to be just like the
Iraqi and North Korean regimes that are
always being criticized."
He emphasized again: "Remember what happened
after Diana died. People experienced,
through their sadness and other emotions, a
reconnection with reality. That is what we
are seeing now, but this time, I think we
will see more profound, and longer-lasting
effects."
BLAIRITE PROPAGANDA: "THE
REAL SIGN OF DESPERATION"
With their backs to the wall, Blair and his
entourage are mounting a flight-forward
counter-attack, on three interrelated
fronts, all of which have the potential to
backfire, and blow up in their faces.
For one, Blair himself, in his Feb. 15
speech to the spring Labour conference in
Glasgow, suddenly "shifted the goalposts",
and changed the official British government
policy, for why it thinks war with Iraq is
necessary. Until now, as proclaimed in a
number of dubious British government
dossiers, Iraq's guilt was that it possessed
weapons of mass destruction that could be
handed over to terrorist groups, and that it
was deceptively concealing this "fact". But
on Feb. 15, Blair insisted that "humanity
would be better off" without Saddam Hussein,
and that this was a fundamental moral issue.
This was the first official endorsement, by
Blair, of the Bush Administration's "regime
change in Iraq" agenda.
Linked to this, is the point stressed to EIR
by a number of informed British strategists,
and by commentaries in the British press:
Blair is desperate for war, as soon as
possible, and for that war to be
devastating, short, and effective, so that
he can neutralize his millions of British
detractors, with the sneer, "I was right all
along, and you were wrong." Of course, this
is an enormously high-risk strategy, as well
as being disgusting, morally, and homicidal,
in terms of what war would unleash, in Iraq,
among its neighbors, and globally.
The third prong of the Blair
counter-strategy, is to tar his enemies,
with having "blood on their hands", for
"supporting Saddam", and, more crudely, as
"stooges of Saddam". This propaganda
campaign is receiving giant support from the
neo-conservative press owned by Rupert
Murdoch (Times, Sunday Times, Sun) and Lord
Conrad Black's Hollinger Corporation
(Spectator magazine, Daily Telegraph, Sunday
Telegraph), as well as from a handful of
"liberal imperialist" leftist commentators.
An egregiously blatant example of this, was
provided by the Times' Maniac-in-Chief, Lord
William Rees-Mogg, who headlined his weekly
column Feb. 17, on the subject of the Feb.
15 mass demonstrations: "In All Honesty,
They Were Still Saddam's Useful Idiots." He
ranted: "I respect the good intentions of
those who marched on Saturday.
Unfortunately, the road to hell is paved
with good intentions."
Rees-Mogg and his ilk were roasted, in the
same Feb. 17 Times, by one of Britain's most
respected military strategists, Sir Timothy
Garden. Currently at the Department of
Defence Studies, King's College, London,
Garden was formerly Commandant of the Royal
College of Defence Studies, and later
director of the Royal Institute of
International Affairs ("Chatham House").
He asserted:
"The rush to war in Iraq
gives an opportunity for every merchant of
spin to stir the pot. Plagiarised academic
writings are attributed to impeccable
intelligence sources. International
terrorism, local dissidents and tinpot
dictators are linked with nuclear weapons by
inadequate commas. Old inspectors' reports
are rehashed to sound like new discoveries
of Iraqi deception. But the real sign of
desperation is when the war advocates start
calling their critics appeasers."
Garden acknowledged, that there are
certainly likenesses between Saddam Hussein
and Adolf Hitler, but the comparisons
quickly can be reduced to meaninglessness.
Hitler had vast military potential, and
there are real lessons to be learned, about
the dangers of having appeased him. But
Iraq's military infrastructure has been
significantly destroyed and dismantled, and
there has been a "successful mixture of
containment and deterrence" in dealing with
him, so it is absurd to accuse France and
Germany of appeasement if they delay
precipitate use of military force against
him.
He concluded:
"The contrast
between pre-war Germany and Iraq could
scarcely be more stark. In Iraq, we face a
Third World country that has been declining
in military strength since we stopped
supporting its regional power strategy....
With no threat to Europe, America, or even
to Iraq's neighbors, war seems a very odd
choice."
|
