Blair losing battle to prove his influence

We were told that the road to solving the Israel-Palestine crisis was through Baghdad. At the time I thought it was Bush saying what Blair wanted to hear, but it nevertheless had an enormous influence when Labour MP's were asked whether or not they supported the war.

Now, as Blair traipses through the Middle East attempting to put together a peace deal, the silence and lack of effort from the US emphasises just how much Blair has been duped. The US has no interest in doing anything that the Israelis don't want done. And pushing them to negotiate with the Palestinians is the last thing Bush is going to do, despite the Baker Report pointing out the importance of this conflict in the global war on terror.

The trip has been overshadowed by a growing perception that Mr Blair's relationship with President Bush is very much a "one-way street" in which Britain gets very little in return for his unwavering public backing for Washington. Even some Blairites are starting to question the Prime Minister's stance. They are appalled that President Bush has refused to honour his 2004 promise to expend "capital" on the Middle East peace process during his second term. "He doesn't cut Tony much slack," one Blair aide said yesterday.

Of course, Blair continues to insist that all future British PM's will bask in the glow of the "special relationship" just as he has done.

"I think most people, when they are actually in a position of having to take the decisions, will come to the same view," he said. "Us having a strong relationship with America is one reason why, when I come and discuss the Israel/Palestine issue out in the Middle East, you are having a different kind of conversation, precisely because you have got a relationship with America."

This is delusional. He is having almost no influence in the Middle East, nor is he stating any position that differs in any way from the Americans. Indeed, he has now moved the UK away from it's traditional support of the Palestinians in this dispute and firmly into the American/Israeli camp. But even from this position he is finding it impossible to get the Americans or the Israelis to properly engage.

This is because the Israelis are not interested in any peace deal that does not allow them to keep Palestinian land. It is to this end that they continue to look for a "reasonable" party to negotiate with. This means, in actuality, someone who will give them what they want, despite what they want being against international law.

First we had Golda Meir telling us there were no such things as Palestinians, then the Israelis couldn't negotiate with the PLO, then they couldn't negotiate with Arafat, now they can't negotiate with Hamas. The past forty years have consisted of the Israelis pretending they are looking for a partner in peace whilst always finding the person representing the Palestinians as unworthy of negotiating with. This enables the Israelis to continue their illegal land grabbing whilst pleasing their rather naive American counterparts that they are serious about peace.

Blair was a fool to believe that, if it ever came to a choice between the UK and Israel, that the UK would be listened to before the Israelis - even if, cross that out, especially if the UK was seriously promoting the concept of a genuine peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

However, the US continue to promote the lie of the Special Relationship:

Robert Tuttle, the US ambassador in London, said: "Our relationship is the strongest of any two governments in the world and I think the world is a better place for that relationship."

If Tuttle continues to believe that the relationship the US has with the UK is stronger than the relationship the US has with Israel then he must surely be on smack.

There is only one Special Relationship and it is not with the UK.

Blair's problems and his ineffectuality as he tours the Middle East are a testament to that fact.

Click title for full article.

tag: Blair, Bush, pro-Israeli lobby, US foreign policy, Israel, Palestine, Quartet, Chatham House Report