Comment at end

9th November, 2009

REMEMBRANCE DAY – REMEMBER, GORDON?

I saw this reported earlier and frankly I didn’t believe it.

Our present Prime Minister – Gordon Brown – was the only one laying a wreath NOT TO BOW at the cenotaph.

But it’s TRUE!

Gordon Brown walks to the cenotaph to lay his wreath, watched by Nick Clegg (Lib Dem leader), Tony Blair and David Cameron (Conservative leader.)

Watch the video here. Mr Brown walks forward to lay his wreath on behalf of the government at around 42mins 50secs.  He follows all the Royal family. They had all bowed their heads in the expected way after laying their wreaths.

Mr Brown – OUR PRIME MINISTER – did not. All the other politicians following him did bow.

You will notice that Mr Brown looked particularly restless in the several minutes before he walked to lay the wreath. Not at all comfortable. In contrast Tony Blair was unflinching in his stillness.

I can only surmise that Mr Brown’s failure to bow his head, even just slightly, was not an intended snub to our troops or their families but rather an oversight. Perhaps it was a sign of his nervousness over current public unrest regarding the Afghanistan conflict.

But whatever it was I am sure it would never have happened if Mr Blair were laying that wreath.

Oh, for God’s sake, Gordon. If the job’s too tough, please get out of the kitchen.

The FT: A central European diplomat says that Tony Blair, although not presently favourite for EU president, ‘may come back’ as ‘nothing is excluded.’

Comment at end

8th November, 2009

In case readers get the impression that this is the only blog out there in support of Tony Blair, it’s time to mention a few others.

And just as a reminder, there follows just some of the reasons WHY his supporters remain loyal. I don’t purport to speak for all the opinions on Tony Blair of all the below-mentioned, of course. But it seems fair to suggest that at least some of these reasons apply in most of these cases. If not, I’m sure they’ll correct me.

First the WHO.

Later (here) the WHY.

WHO ARE SOME OF THE BLOGGERS FOR BLAIR?

1. There’s the Blair Foundation Blogspot – Recent post Europygmies V EU President Blair, Round 2. Latest post is – Full text: Cameron speech on EU – So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye

Blair Foundation Blogspot links to this reference to the EU’s representation on the IMF Board being reduced to ONE. A suggestion of the EU federalist and present prime minister Jean-Claude Juncker. This man also happens to be a candidate for the EU presidency; useful to know where he’s coming from and where he’d like to take us.

2. Here at the excellent Against Mainstream Opinion, Puschiii’s present post is titled “The Superstar and the Nobodies”.

3. Would you Buy it For a Quarter has various writers, on various topics. Caela, one of their contributors,  is a strong Blair supporter.

MAINSTREAM JOURNALISTS

There are even mainstream journalists whose pro-Blair credentials are frequently on show. Of these Tony Blair’s biographer John Rentoul is pre-eminent.  Samples of his writings here – Did Blair betray Britain – answer “No” and here -  Cameron is the New Blair.

Rentoul along with Oliver Kamm -  Europe’s runners and riders – and Stephen Pollard all signed the Ban Blair-Baiting petition (at the Iraq Inquiry). For me, that marks them out as good guys amongst the generally severely infected ranks of the feral beasts of the British press.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

To be quite frank I am astonished, although perhaps I shouldn’t be, that there is only one MP – Tom Harris – who makes it clear repeatedly that he is a Blair Supporter. Recently he wrote on Blair, Cameron & Europe. Tom too signed the Ban Blair-Baiting petition. Presumably the rest of the Labour party would just love to see Blair “baited”!

NOT FORGETTING

Alastair Campbell’s blog’s raison d-etre, in common with the other above-named journalists, is not specifically in order to support his old friend. But he does so on many occasions, such as here and here.

NOW THE WHY

WHY his supporters think Blair is the right man to be the first permanent EU Council president.

LEADERSHIP

Re-telling the work he did as Prime Minister will never convince those whose opining pales in comparison to Blair’s action. That’s par for the course. But for the more rational among us it is clear that the peace settlement in Northern Ireland, the devolution settlements to Scotland and Wales and his public finance initiatives in health and education will all be lasting monuments.

On becoming leader in 1994 Tony Blair set about rescuing his party from 18 years in the wilderness. Even before becoming PM he had ditched  Clause 4.

Watch and hear Blair here in 1990 when he was Shadow Employment Secretary.  Disregard for a moment the rights & wrongs of the ‘closed shop’ debate. Listen to how the masterful Blair frames his attack on then Employment Secretary Michael Howard. Tony Blair, seven years away from becoming PM says, “.. it is wrong because it looks back not forward. We cannot address the challenges of the future through the prejudices of the past.” Ring any bells in today’s EU argument?

Tony Blair vs. Michael Howard January 1990

In 1997 he went on to win a landslide victory taking seats the Labour party could only ever have dreamt of under any other leader. This was followed by a second landslide in 2001, but only after Blair had set in train the settlement of the decades-long conflict in Northern Ireland, which was to take all of his ten years as Prime Minister to complete.

INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTIONS

Internationally Tony Blair helped lead the battle to free Muslims from Christian ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. He rescued thousands from brutal attacks including limb-chopping, rape and murder in Sierra Leone in 2000.

After  9/11, 2001 Blair stood by America’s side, as ANY British Prime Minister would and should have done.  Britain, was a first mover, true, but was only one of DOZENS of countries to stand by the USA.  Blair’s Britain was NOT alone in supporting “Bush’s America” in its attack in Afghanistan, much as those of selective memories like to claim it was.

And as for Iraq – the same applied.

The 2003 invasion of Iraq, (from March 20 to May 1, 2003) was led by the United States, backed by British forces and smaller contingents from Australia, Denmark, Poland and Spain. Four countries participated with troops during the initial invasion phase, which lasted from March 20 to May 1. These were the United States (248,000), United Kingdom (45,000), Australia (2,000), and Poland (194). 36 other countries were involved in its aftermath.

Some insist that the Iraq invasion was a failure, disaster, or whatever choice descriptive word fits their own agendas. In fact it seems to be dawning on many that in intent, motivation and in outcome it was by far the more successful of the two Middle East wars that the west has recently become engaged in.

It is extremely odd and peculiarly unbalanced how Blair’s interventions which resulted in peace are seldom recognised in anything like the same terms as these two ‘wars of choice’ are.  Presumably if they had all been over in a fortnight, all would have been AOK.

NOBEL PRIZE STILL OUTSTANDING

Mr Obama got one, though what for WHO knows.  I certainly don’t. But for his efforts in several parts of the world, for our former PM, zilch recognition from this quarter. This is a shameful omission.

THE PRO-ACTIVE FORMER PRIME MINISTER

Since stepping down from office, Mr Blair has been uniquely pro-active. In fact his naysayers find his ‘boundless energy’ irritating.  Envious, embittered armchair generals and opiners? Certainly NOT deciders.

From his Sports Foundation in the north of England, which has already funded coaches and children in sports, to his Faith Foundation set up to bring faiths together, Mr Blair has been dynamic.  In fact he’s the dynamos’ dynamo.

He takes the expected and clearly envious flak for the fact that he is highly prized and rewarded as a public speaker and as an adviser to business. At the same time he has become a professor at Yale university on Faith and Globalisation.

In fact I contend it would be difficult to invent a character so complex and so successfully busy, and sell such a story as fiction.

CLIMATE ISSUES

For years, and perhaps particularly since leaving office, he has led the climate change debate WORLDWIDE. He is now a leading light in The Climate Group.

Here, Chinese martial arts champion and film star Jet-Li praises Mr Blair’s contribution to the debate and to the ACTION.

What does Jet-Li have to say about the other contenders for the EU presidency? Might I suggest, ‘Er … who?’

In fact what does the EU and the world have to say about the other candidates’ commitment to ANY of the world’s important causes? The very idea that some in the EU think Blair is NOT the right man for this job is mind-boggling.

Jet Li and Tony Blair launch 1000 village plan to tackle climate change (Aug 2009)

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toPblDNzOa4]

Pictures from Jet Li’s site – Alive, not Dead

CLIMATE WORLDWIDE

And here, on 4th November Mr Blair spells out the critical importance of Copenhagen at the recent Queensland Climate Summit

Tony Blair urges investment in Rwanda and Sierra Leone at the ‘Private Equity in Africa’ Summit

Tony Blair meets volunteers on Lumley Beach in Sierra Leone

View more from Tony Blair’s YouTube channel here and at his website here.

QUARTET ENVOY TO THE MIDDLE EAST

Mr Blair got this job before he left Downing Street. But, despite a lot of good work on the streets and with business and infrastructure projects, some of which have been held up for months by the Israelis, Mr Blair does not and never did have the power to bring peace to the troubled Israeli/Palestine conflict. He was never a “peace negotiator” and so has not ‘failed’ in that task.

In a dreadful and misleading article at The Guardian George Monbiot repeated the much-abused description of Tony Blair as “the Middle East peace envoy”. In fact the Quartet’s statement of his appointment  showed that his mandate was to encourage foreign investment in Palestine and related matters. His job was not to run, organise or push in political terms the peace process.

But as many Americans say that Obama has failed, failed, failed in the Middle East, Blair is still blamed by some for not yet having solved the issues on his little ownsome. After all, ordinary mortals have been trying to resolve it for the last 60 years. What’s taking SuperBlair so long?

On Thursday, PA leader Mahmoud Abbas said he would stand down in January, and today, despite being urged to change his mind by Israel’s  Peres, he is talking about dismantling the PA and declaring the peace process over.

LONDON OLYMPICS

In 2012 the eyes of the world will be on London’s Olympic Games. Whose legacy is this? One guess? Without Mr Blair’s relentless input this would clearly never have been won. Mr Obama couldn’t do it recently for America, but Mr Blair did it for Britain.

THE EU ‘PRESIDENCY’

The burning issue right now is whether Mr Blair will, or even should take the post of the first president of the EU Council. It is clear where I stand on this. There is no real alternative. And even if there were A N Other who was tackling important concerns like the climate and religious issues, few would have Blair’s experience or high profile and perhaps above all his unmatched communication skills.

It was ever thus, of course. But Blair’s leadership abilities have been even clearer to see in comparison to Brown since he left office, love him or loathe him.

Unlike Blair, Gordon Brown has always been unable to explain coherently our engagement in Afghanistan. It was exactly the same over Iraq.  I do not recall the forces’ chiefs criticising Blair’s leadership as they do Brown.

Talk at the Telegraph is that on Monday the news may be that Belgium’s (until now unknown) Prime Minister, Van-Rompuy may learn that he has clinched the EU presidency. We’ll see.

This 1st November article at The Times raises some interesting thoughts as to the ins-and-outs of deciding the EU presidency. Ignore the commenters. Their antipathy towards Blair will hold no water as more light and less heat is cast upon the issues.

Meanwhile at Gleneagles – BROWN’S FINANCIAL SURPRISE & CLIMATE AGREEMENT FAILURE

At the G20 in St Andrews Gordon Brown is not getting as much support as he’d like. From Canada and more importantly from the USA on Brown’s plans for a financial transaction levy the US Treasury Secretary Timothy Gethner responded with a big “no, no”. The British Bankers Association says this 30 year-old idea is not a runner, since it would be impossible to get ALL countries on board.

Something tells me that if he were still Prime Minister Mr Blair would NEVER have suggested this policy.

As for the G20’s hopes for a climate agreement – er  – well, nothing. Bodes well for Copenhagan, doesn’t it?

Which brings me back to the main reason many of us support Tony Blair – political nous, high profile in the important issues and the LEADERSHIP to advance  the agenda.

• 1. Kiss of death for Cameron? Claire Short and Tony Benn think the Tories are in tune with THEM! You couldn’t – no you really couldn’t – make this up!
• 2. Popularity – Sarkozy is presently only polling 39% as in this Telegraph article where a popular French politician has been told to fermer la bouche, or ’shut your gob’ in the ‘French’ colloquial.
• 3. It seems that 16% of Germans wish they’d voted ‘differently’ in their recent elections. For whom, it doesn’t say. Maybe most wish they HAD voted for Merkel. But whatever, it shows that politicians’ popularity can go down as well as up. It puts Blair’s ’support’ (which is still substantial compared to Brown’s present support) as EU president into perspective.
• 4. And as Gordon Brown like the rest of us, awaits leadership from America on Afghanistan, Mr Blair Obama says on his health policy – ‘the hand of history is on our shoulder’. Original, eh?
• 5. Blair’s last throw of the dice for presidency
• 6. Milband remains in frame amid “secret talks”

Q&A Timetable on Blair’s (& Others’) EU Dream – How Soon Will They Know? Soon.

Comment at end

7th November, 2009

ALASTAIR CAMPBELL WRITING BETWEEN THE LINES

As British military leaders attack Gordon Brown for his lack of leadership over Afghanistan – [what! have they just noticed?] - Alastair Campbell adds his two pennurth.

It must be tough at times, trying to write between the lines for this Labour party faithful.  It’s tough enough for the rest of us trying to read that way.

US clarity of strategy required for full explanation on Afghanistan

Gordon Brown is right today to be setting out – and he should keep setting out – the basic case for Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan.

As Paddy Ashdown said yesterday, this war will not be won or lost militarily, but in the bars, sitting rooms and workplaces of those countries – democracies – who are contributing the soldiers putting their lives at risk.

So the democracies have to be persuaded, again and again, that the sacrifice and bloodshed is worthy of the cause. Not easy against the backdrop of a corrupt and widely discredited Afghan leadership being re-elected. Nor when we know so much of the drugs on our streets comes from there. Nor when an Afghan the British are training turns fire on them and adds to our war dead.

The current situation reminds me of an important moment during the Kosovo crisis when President Clinton and Tony Blair came to the view that however mightier, in military terms, Nato was against Milosevic’s forces, the public opinion battle was being lost, putting the entire strategy at risk.

What’s more, in some ways it was easier to explain Kosovo. Night after night TV was telling the stories of barbarism and butchery as people fled ethnic cleansing in their tens of thousands. Basic human sympathy was also matched by a hard-headed worry among leaders and public alike that today’s refugees would become tomorrow’s additional strain on EU countries like ours.

And even with those factors at play, it was hard enough.

Afghanistan is harder. The memories of 9/11 and 7/7, for many, are not as powerful as they were. The threat to troops on the ground is all too clear. The threat they are seeking to contain – terrorism fostered there then implemented here – is less clear, and when prevented it is invisible, so less easy to explain. The complicated politics of the region, Pakistan’s as well as Afghanistan’s, make it even harder.

But the other recollection I have from Kosovo is that when the explanation is clear, detailed, and co-ordinated across the countries involved, then the public will listen and understand, even when things go wrong.

As in so much else, the US have to take the lead. The decisions President Obama has in his pending tray are about as big as they get for a leader. That explains why he is taking his time.

As I said on a vlog here recently, I think Obama, facing a newly resurgent and pretty vicious Republican Party, is a good man doing a good job, and he deserves continuing support. But it is harder for Britain, and the other countries involved in Afghanistan, properly to explain the situation without the absolute clarity of strategy from the US.

As well as giving leaders space to explain, the public will also give leaders time to reach difficult decisions. But the US strategy needs that real clarity pretty soon. Then, as the military strategy unfolds, there has to be a concerted and internationalised communications strategy alongside it.

Nato v Milosevic, militarily, was like Manchester United against a Conference team. It is the same now, though the Taliban are in some ways an even tougher opponent than the Serbs back then.

But Ashdown is right that public opinion, in the collection of democracies involved, is where the strategy can be derailed.

So GB is right to be out there today, explaining. But it will become a lot easier for him and the other leaders involved when Obama has spoken clearly and definitively on the medium and the long term, and how the objectives for both are to be met.

Patrick McGovern

2009-11-06 11:19:20

You mention three figures from the past – Blair, Clinton and Ashdown. Plus you allude to what you yourself did — I have read The Blair Years — in Kosovo. Could the problem be that in the case of all four of you, with the ‘jury out’ possible exception of Obama, your successors do not have the same skills of leadership and communication?

1. I don’t suggest that it is easy for Brown or Obama to lay the case out as clearly as they might, or should. They both watched as their predecessors were taken apart in the press over Iraq and Afghanistan, and their every motive questioned. But …

2. When the day dawns that one of the high-and-mighties who have been running our armed forces over recent years  AND such as Mr Ashdown admit that there was ONE British leader recently who actually got it RIGHT on this explain/don’t complain approach, I’ll eat my hat.

LEADERSHIP IS IMPORTANT.

RELATED

Ashdown – ‘Afghanistan could be lost in the bars of Britain’

Q&A Timetable on Blair’s (& Others’) EU Dream – How Soon Will They Know? Soon.

Comment at end

7th November, 2009

P.S. TO THE PREVIOUS POST …

BLAIR’S BRITAIN IS TOO BIG FOR THE EU JOB

In a respected German paper there is an article about Juncker which sounded particularly aggressive towards Germany. It also has this, from Luxembourg’s Prime Minister, and EU presidential candidate:

“Juncker betonte, es habe bei der Schaffung des Postens im gescheiterten Verfassungsvertrag “ein informelles Einverständnis gegeben, dass der erste EU-Ratspräsident nicht aus einem großen Land kommen sollte”.

Translation -

“Juncker stressed when the job was introduced in the failed Constitution, an informal consensus between the heads of states was reached that the first EU President should not come from a big member state.”

The whole page has been translated here (If it does not open  go to Google translator and input this web page url.)

Since Tony Blair is one of the few “candidates” in the reckoning from one of the biggest states and is second behind Belgium’s Van Rompuy in the betting, this ‘reminder’ would seem to be aimed squarely at Britain’s candidate.

We are expected to accept that the leaders of all the big countries agreed to exclude big countries’ presidency candidates.  And that our then leader agreed to that too.

REALLY?

It’s possible he might have remembered that little detail.

UNWRITTEN AGREEMENT? AS GOOD AS THE PAPER IT WAS WRITTEN ON

If there was an unwritten agreement to that effect, it might explain why some candidates names have ‘emerged’ rather than been declared.  In that case it may be that any unwritten agreement is as useful as the paper it was (un)written on.

So who are the other candidates? Below are those listed at Paddy Power, excluding the top four favourites. Apart from François Fillon (the current PM of France, don’t you know?) there is no other candidate from what would normally be described as a ‘BIG’ EU state.

No Germans, no Italians. The closest to BIG are the Spanish and Dutch candidates. Candidates below listed as in order of betting odds, the four current favourites excluded.

Wolfgang Schüssel (born June 7, 1945) is a Christian Democratic Austrian politician. He was Chancellor of Austria from February 2000 to January 2007. Since 2006 he has been chairman of the Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) faction in parliament.

Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga (also known as Vaira Vikis-Freibergs) was the 6th President of Latvia and first female President of Latvia and of eastern Europe. She was elected President of Latvia in 1999 and re-elected in 2003.

Guy Verhofstadt (Dutch pronunciation: [ˈɣiː vəɾˈɦɔfstɑt] ( listen); born Guy Maurice Marie Louise Verhofstadt, 11 April 1953) is a Belgian politician who was Prime Minister of Belgium from 1999 to 2008. He is currently a Member of the European Parliament and leader of the liberal group in Parliament

Felipe González Márquez (born 5 March 1942) is a Spanish socialist politician. He was the General Secretary of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) from 1974 to 1997. To date, he remains the longest-serving Prime Minister of Spain, after having served four successive mandates from 1982 to 1996. He is married and has three children.

Martti Ahtisaari (born June 23, 1937) was a UN diplomat and a President of Finland (1994 – 2000).
Martti Oiva Kalevi Ahtisaari was born in Viipuri. His father was of Norwegian descent. During the Continuation War his family moved to Kuopio, where he spent most of his childhood until they moved to Oulu in 1952. In Oulu, he joined the local YMCA. In 1959, he graduated as a teacher through a distance-learning course.

Aleksander Kwaśniewski ( [alɛˈksandɛr kfaɕˈɲɛfskʲi] (help·info); born November 15, 1954) is a post-communist Polish socialist politician who served as the President of Poland from 1995 to 2005. He was born in Białogard, and during the communist rule he was active in the communist controlled Socialist Union of Polish Students (Socjalistyczny Związek Studentów Polskich) and was sports minister in the communist government in 1980s. After the fall of communism he became a leader of the left-wing, post-communist Social Democracy of the Republic of Poland, successor to the former ruling communist Polish United Workers Party, and a cofounder of the Democratic Left Alliance

John Bruton is a former Irish Prime Minister (Taoiseach), who helped transform the Irish economy into the “Celtic Tiger,” one of the fastest growing economies in the world. In the year before he took office (1993) the Irish economy grew by 2.7%. During his time as Taoiseach (1994-1997), the Irish economy grew at an annual average rate of 8.7%, peaking at 11.1% in 1997. John Bruton was also deeply involved in the Northern Irish Peace Process leading to the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, under whose terms a conflict of allegiances dating back to the seventeenth century was resolved.

Paavo Tapio Lipponen ( pronunciation (help·info)) (born April 23, 1941) is a Finnish politician and former reporter. He was Prime Minister of Finland from 1995 to 2003 ^[1], and Chairman of the Finnish Social Democratic Party from 1993 to 2005. He also served as Speaker of the Parliament of Finland 2003-2007 ^[2].

François Fillon (French pronunciation: [fʁɑ̃swa fijɔ̃]; born 4 March 1954 in Le Mans, Sarthe) is the current Prime Minister of France, having been appointed to that office by President Nicolas Sarkozy on 17 May 2007.^[1][2]

Tarja Kaarina Halonen (help·info) (Finnish pronunciation: [tɑrjɑ kɑːrinɑ hɑlonen]; born December 24, 1943) is the 11th and current President of Finland. The first female to hold the office, Halonen had previously been a member of the parliament from 1979 to 2000 when she resigned after her election to the presidency. In addition to her political career she had a long and extensive career in trade unions and different non-governmental organizations.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen (Danish pronunciation: [⁽ˈ⁾ɑnɐs ˈfɔʊ̯ˀ ˈʀɑsmusn̩] ( listen)) (born 26 January 1953) is a Danish politician, and the current Secretary General of NATO^[1]. Rasmussen served as Prime Minister of Denmark from November 27, 2001 to April 5, 2009.

Mary Therese Winifred Robinson (Irish: Máire Mhic Róibín;^[2] born 21 May 1944) served as the seventh, and first female, President of Ireland, serving from 1990 to 1997, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, from 1997 to 2002.

See all candidates here with current betting.

RELATED

• EU President? Meet the Candidates … From NETHERLANDS – Jan Balkenende
• EU President? Meet the Candidates … From BELGIUM – Van Rompuy

Q&A Timetable on Blair’s (& Others’) EU Dream – How Soon Will They Know? Soon.

Comment at end

6th November, 2009

JEAN-CLAUDE JUNCKER

The Champion of European Federalism

Luxembourg’s Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker is a modern-day Jean Monnet.  The European federalist sans égal. As such he’s the enemy of all the inter-governmentalists, and is of course very popular in Brussels.

Twice he has held the rotating presidency of the European Council in 1997 and 2005, years in which Tony Blair won two of his three general elections.  But Juncker’s political longevity is greater than was Blair’s.  By January 2010 Junckner will have been PM of his country for 15 years.

He evidently feels it is time to step up in the world.

Famous for criticising other European countries for defending their national rights, he is presently doing the same.  He’s determined to protect Luxembourg’s tax haven status against recent attacks from G20 members, including more powerful EU countries, as referred to here:

Excerpt:

I find the treatment of certain states to be incomprehensible.” Juncker had said previously that if Luxembourg were put on any international list of offshore financial centers then “Delaware, Nevada and Wyoming should also be named and shamed as tax havens.”

His tax tance on behalf of tiny Luxembourg may put his name in the anti column, while his integrationalist federalism position may place him in the pro column in the eyes of many EU colleagues.

EU President? Meet the Candidates … Jan Balkenende
EU President? Meet the Candidates … Van Rompuy

UNCONSCIOUS OR A WAR LEADER?  NOT NECESSARILY DEAD

James Kirkup, Political correspondent at The Telegraph has a quick comparison of the Luxembourg PM, Jean-Claude Juncker Vs Tony Blair for the EU presidency.

I rather enjoyed both these conclusions – 1, even if in a coma you can still win an election; 2, even after launching a so-called “unpopular” war you can still win an election.

Tony Blair:

Leadership experience: British prime minister 1997 until 2007, governing a G-8 economy with a population of 60 million and an independent nuclear deterrent

Significant European achievements: despite once saying that membership of the euro is Britain’s destiny, failed entirely to move the UK closer to joining. Promised a referendum on the European Constitution but backed out when it was reborn as the Lisbon Treaty.

Wars started: 2 major (Iraq, Afghanistan) and 2 other significant deployments (Sierra Leone, Kosovo)

Best quote: “I am a pretty straight sort of guy.” (BBC, October 1997.)

Most impressive electoral victory: in 2003, sent British troops into ill-fated war in Iraq, but still won the 2005 general election.

Jean-Claude Juncker:

Leadership experience: Prime Minister of Luxembourg from 1995 to the present day, governing a Grand Duchy with a population of 500,000 and a standing army of 800.

Significant European achievements: the father of the euro. Wrote large sections of the Maastricht Treaty setting out the blueprint for the single European currency. Now chairs the “Eurogroup” of ministers overseeing the euro.

Wars started: 0 (unless you count verbal conflicts with British ministers over plans for a federal Europe)

Best quote: “I am not a dwarf.” (Le Monde, October 2009)

Most impressive electoral victory: in 1989, spent two weeks of his election campaign in a coma after a car crash, but still won his seat in parliament.

Check the current betting here

6 Nov, 2009, 22:00: Rompuy – (favourite) 4/6; Tony Blair 5/1; Balkenende 6/1; Juncker 6/1

RELATED

John Elledge at Liberal Conspiracy: ‘WHY EU PRESIDENT BLAIR ISN’T A BAD IDEA’

Now and again … all the time, to be more accurate, it’s clear that commenters at some blogs & papers find it hard to get their little heads round the facts of the arguments.  Other factors keep getting in the way. Commenters at Liberal Conspiracy exemplify this.

Well done Mr Elledge for trying. You’re right, they’re wrong.

Comment at end

6th November, 2009

MANDELSON ON STRONG LEADERSHIP & ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION

Peter Mandelson has been talking at a meeting of the Bruegel thinktank in Brussels today.

And the Times reports that both Brown and Mandelson are pushing for Blair as EU presidency as the race enters the home stretch.

Described as  ‘leading a last-ditch effort to have Tony Blair elected as EU president as the diplomatic wrangling over the new post entered its final stages’, it is clear that the debate is centred around the constituency which counts.

The Prime Minister made the case for his predecessor in a conversation with Fredrik Reinfeldt, the Swedish Prime Minister, whose job it is to draw up a shortlist of candidates. Yesterday Mr Reinfeldt began a first round of “confessionals” — one-on-one talks with all 27 EU leaders.

Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, will pitch in with a speech in Brussels outlining his vision of the EU as a global player with a liberal economy led by a strong, international statesman.

His speech is a riposte to seven small EU countries that have implicitly attacked the candidacy of Mr Blair — one of the few candidates with star quality — by calling for the first president to be a chairman, not a chief.

By Timothy Heritage

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Business Secretary Peter Mandelson will call Friday for strong leadership of the European Union and outline his vision for revamping its economic policies.

Although Mandelson will not name Tony Blair in the speech, his comments could be seen as an attempt to revive the former prime minister’s chances of becoming the EU’s first long-term president.

Media say Prime Minister Gordon Brown has continued to promote Blair as a candidate, even though French President Nicolas Sarkozy has signalled that he and German Chancellor Angela Merkel will not back him.

“The point I will keep coming back to today is that we have a problem of leadership in Europe and political willingness to drive change,” Mandelson will say, according to a text of the speech distributed to reporters in Brussels.

In the speech, to be delivered in the Belgian capital, he will call for “a new European leadership and a whole new magnitude of political cooperation.”

Mandelson, a former EU trade commissioner, will also call for more innovation in business, a realignment of budget priorities and a “low carbon, high growth, high employment, banking-crisis-free future.”

He will also warn that EU plans to tighten regulation of hedge funds and private equity managers could choke off investments and deepen the global credit crunch.

MEMBER STATES SEEK CONSENSUS-BUILDER

Blair’s chances of becoming president of the Council of EU leaders have been hampered by other member states’ concerns that he backed the U.S-led war in Iraq and by their desire for a leader who can build consensus.

Although Blair’s chances have faded, Mandelson made clear to Brussels-based reporters in a video link-up from London on Thursday that the former prime minister was capable of securing compromises and building consensus.

“He brokered very radical change and reform in the Labour Party and built a consensus, and that was not easy. I saw him do the same in Northern Ireland,” he said of peace efforts under Blair.

The post of president for a renewable term of 2-1/2 years is being created under the Lisbon treaty, which will reform EU institutions and decision-making to try to increase the 27-country bloc’s standing on the world stage.

Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy and Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende are also among the possible candidates.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband is widely seen as the front-runner for the post of foreign policy high representative, a post that will have greater powers under the treaty which goes into force on December 1.

Other possible candidates for the foreign policy chief job include EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn and former Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik.

Rompuy – ing into the EU Presidency? The man who can barely ’stop the traffic in Brussels’ – the Belgian PM -  may be about to savour sweet revenge on Tony Blair.

Excerpt:

‘Five years ago Blair vetoed the appointment of Guy Verhofstadt, Van Rompuy’s predecessor as PM, as commission president. Asked about Blair on Flemish TV last month, Van Rompuy said: “We have not forgotten.” He may yet have his revenge.’

I just wonder if the rest of the EU too holds such long-held grudges.  Or if others will be as celebratory as some Belgians if Blair is rejected for a prime minister who can barely stop the traffic in his own capital city.

Comment at end

5th November, 2009

HEALTH WARNING

Swallow with pinch of salt. Apart from a denial from Downing Street AND Mr Miliband’s own office, and apart from the fact that no candidate is awarded the high representative’s job “just like that” (especially when he is not even an official candidate) this ‘news’ has a certain whiff about it.

When Mr Blair says he is out of the race for the presidency I’ll believe this story. Until then I suggest there is some politicking afoot.

Still, worth a read. From politics.co.uk comes this:

Miliband heading to Europe

Thursday, 05, Nov 2009 12:44, by Emmeline Saunders

David Miliband has accepted the European foreign policy minister role he was tipped for, a Labour source has told politics.co.uk.

The foreign secretary could announce his new position within the next fortnight, triggering a by-election in his South Shields constituency seat which might be contested by Peter Mandelson.

The business secretary could even take over leadership of the party after what is widely anticipated to be a dire election result for Gordon Brown and Labour.

There is speculation within the Labour party that Lord Mandelson could become a caretaker leader after the general election – assuming Labour lose – for a single term, before handing power over to Mr Miliband, the source claimed.

Now the Lisbon treaty has been ratified by the Czech government, EU officials want the new ‘foreign minister’ post of high representative and that of the presidency of the European council filled in the next month, to be operational by January 1st.

Mr Miliband has distanced himself from the EU’s first high representative for foreign policy role, but has not ruled himself out of the running. He could only be a realistic contender if former prime minister Tony Blair’s candidacy for the presidency fails.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman said today she had not heard that Mr Miliband had accepted the job. Officials had previously denied his interest in the post.

Sources close to Mr Miliband strenuously denied the reports this morning.

The prime minister and foreign secretary were involved in a terse exchange at a Brussels press conference last week when they were asked about the shortlist of candidates. Mr Brown quickly dismissed rumours that Mr Miliband had been proposed for the job.

“Let me just say, I have been at the meeting,” Mr Brown said.

“That was not their decision, just let me tell you. Also if there is a shortlist I am sure David would be on it because he has excellent qualifications. But he doesn’t want to be on it. And indeed there is no such list.”

Mr Miliband laughed off the suggestion, replying he was “not available”.

Speculation about his candidacy had been fuelled by a series of speeches he had given on how to campaign for a “global Europe”, which had been viewed as attempts at canvassing for the post.

Lord Mandelson is currently barred from running as an MP as he is a lifetime peer.

But on Sunday the Independent reported he had recently appeared in South Shields to deliver the town’s annual lecture.

For him to stand for the constituency – and have any realistic hope of becoming prime minister – Lord Mandelson faces a significant legislative hurdle.

The constitutional reform bill allowing life peers to resign from the House of Lords is currently at committee stage in the Commons, leaving weeks of procedure remaining.

The writ for a by-election would have to be moved within three months of Mr Miliband stepping down. His term in Europe would begin on January 1st.

But, if timed correctly, there may not be a need for a by-election at all. Seats are often left vacant towards the end of a parliament, to be filled at the general election.

• From BBC blog, Richard Moss
• Yahoo picked it up too

Comment at end

5th November, 2009

U-TURN (-TUBE) IF YOU WANT TO. THE GENTLEMAN’S BEING PHOTOGRAPHED

Tim Montgomerie’s article at yesterday’s Guardian caught my eye because of the accompanying picture more than the content of the article. At first glance it’s rather sweet.  A straight-forward snap of a straightforward political leader on his way to a straightforward re-writing of a certain policy. Well, needs must. Touching up his notes while he’s travelling with the people serves to highlight the everydayness of doing a political u-turn. Thus, no-one really seems to notice or even care.

Conservative leader David Cameron travelling by tube in London on the day he announced the new Conservative policy on Europe, which cancels the previously promised referendum on the Lisbon treaty. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

For those unfamiliar with London’s Tube and its travellers, a word of explanation. Fellow-travellers are famously uncommunicative. Unfriendly, some suggest. People share a space for anything from a two-minute one-stop ride to, well, a lot longer. But it’s generally considered that on The Tube, you’re on your own. A little like in politics. Apart, of course from any friend you came onboard with and who’s still with you when you get off.

But in this picture Mr Cameron hasn’t got William Hague alongside. In fact he’s completely on his little ownsome. Apart, that is, from the photographer who just happened to get on the same tube train, and ended up in the same carriage. He just happened to be in a position to photograph the great soon-to-be leader mixing it with the voters and working intently on what he soon has to say to Johnny Foreigner.

In case you’re thinking this photo may have been taken by a happy mobile phone snapper on the Tube let me disabuse you of this. The photographer according to the Guardian is the Press Association’s Stefan Rousseau, the man who won the photographer of the year prize at the British Press Awards earlier this year.

So no p.r./spinning exercise there from the former p.r. man DC, then.

You can fool some of the people, Mr Cameron.

ADDENDUM

Alastair Campbell too was impressed by DC’s ability to double-task.  No, not doing one thing while saying another, but maintaining his equilibrium while writing and while in motion, as in this ‘tube’ picture. Don’t like to sound suspicious but is this whole picture a fit-up? I travel on the tube regularly and I have yet to find one with NO seats.

David Cameron is expected to say that he is prepared to do battle with the EU to repatriate social and employment powers to Britain. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Meanwhile all Mr Cameron’s fellow-travellers, including one or two recognisable shadow ministers such as Liam Fox, have to hang on for dear life in the usual way, to make sure they don’t come into closer personal contact than is necessarily desirable.

Oh, my suspicious mind (see here.)

RELATED

Blair too ‘Left’ for Europe?

Blair “not a contender” because his politics are too “centre-left” for the key states of France & Germany!? You could have fooled most of us with this definition of Mr Blair’s political position, including, I’d hazard a guess, Mr Blair.

Next reason NOT to have Blair as EU President? My breath is bated.

Q&A on Blair’s EU Dream – How Soon Will He Know?  Soon.  Perhaps very soon.

Comment at end

5th November, 2009

France: ‘Autistic Tories have castrated UK in Europe’

In The Guardian today, the French Europe minister, Pierre Lellouche, says David Cameron’s pledge to reclaim EU powers is ‘pathetic’ and will leave Britain isolated.  This outburst is not simply a result of Cameron’s new EU policy after Lisbon Treaty ratification, in which he promised steps to ’strengthen British sovereignty’ and to ‘repatriate powers and legislation’.

Monsieur Lellouche also refers disparagingly to discussions the Tories have had recently with Sarkozy’s government.

A ‘bizarre sense of autism’ must have been a stinging phrase to fall on Tory ears after Cameron’s policy speech yesterday.

French Europe Minister, Pierre Lellouche, says Tories "autistic". (Pic: Bertrand Guay/AFP/Getty Images)

Lellouche, one of the most Anglophile members of Sarkozy’s government, made his remarkable intervention after David Cameron outlined a fresh Tory approach to the EU in the wake of the full ratification of the Lisbon treaty.

Mr Cameron’s odd attempt to sound tough when the first tough sounds proved useless, may have an even more disastrous effect than he could ever have feared.

As Britain approaches a general election “Anything but the Conservatives” may be at the back of many EU minds. The top EU posts are to be selected soon, perhaps very soon. Will the rest of the EU really want to have to put up with a new (Tory) government which seems set to continue its war of attrition for years to come? And yet the EU needs Britain.

There may be only one way to stop this Tory anti-EU rot. Support Tony Blair for EU President, and through him STOP the TORIES.

Now, I wonder …

Article follows:

Pierre Lellouche:  ”It’s very sad to see Britain just cutting itself out from the rest. It is the result of a long period in opposition.’

The Conservatives have been accused by the French government of “castrating” Britain’s position within the EU by adopting an “autistic” approach that would take Britain off the radar.

Speaking to the Guardian, Pierre Lellouche, France’s Europe minister, described as “pathetic” the Tories’ EU plans announced today, warning they would not succeed “for a minute”.

Giving vent to frustration across the EU, which has so far only been expressed in private, Lellouche – who said he was reflecting Nicolas Sarkozy’s “sadness and regret” – accused William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, of a “bizarre autism” in their discussions.

He said: “They have one line and they just repeat one line. It is a very bizarre sense of autism.”

Lellouche, one of the most Anglophile members of Sarkozy’s government, made his remarkable intervention after David Cameron outlined a fresh Tory approach to the EU in the wake of the full ratification of the Lisbon treaty. A future Conservative government would seek to strengthen British sovereignty and repatriate a series of powers over social and employment legislation, the Tory leader said.

Cameron said he was not seeking an immediate “bust-up” with the EU, and would allow the repatriation of powers negotiations to last as long as five years.

But within hours of his speech, France’s centre-right government condemned the Tory leader’s plans, saying that they would marginalise Britain within the EU.

Abandoning all diplomatic niceties, Lellouche said: “It’s pathetic. It’s just very sad to see Britain, so important in Europe, just cutting itself out from the rest and disappearing from the radar map … This is a culture of opposition … It is the result of a long period of opposition. I know they will come back, but I hope the trip will be short.” He said Cameron’s approach was in line with the Tories’ decision to abandon the main centre-right EPP grouping in the European parliament, of which Sarkozy’s UMP party is a member.

“They are doing what they have done in the European parliament. They have essentially castrated your UK influence in the European parliament,” he said.

Lellouche said he has told Hague personally that his position is a “waste of time for all of us”.

“I have told William Hague: go away for two to three years, in your political economic situation you’re going to be all by your self and you’ll come back. Go ahead and do it. That is my message to them … You want to be marginalised? Well, you go for it. But it’s a waste of time for all of us,” the French minister said.

Lellouche made clear the Tories had no hope of securing any support for their plans.

“It’s not going to happen for a minute. Nobody is going to indulge in rewriting [treaties for] many, many years. Nobody is going to play with the institutions again. It’s going to be take it or leave it and they should be honest and say that,” he said.

“It is a time of tumultuous waters all around us. Wars, terrorism, proliferation, Afghanistan, energy with Russia, massive immigration, economic crisis. It is time when the destiny of Europe is being defined – whether or not we will exist as a third of the world’s GDP capable of fighting it out on climate, on trade, on every … issue on the surface of the Earth.

“We need to be united, otherwise we will be wiped out and marginalised. None of us can do it alone. Whether you’re big or small, the lesson is the same. And [Britain's] risk is one of marginalisation. Irrelevance.”

He said the EU’s frustration with Cameron’s demand to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with Europe stemmed from an EU-wide determination to move on from debates about the constitution of Europe.

He expalined: “Finally we have institutional package, but it took fifteen years of looking at our navel and getting everybody bored to death with sterile debate”.

In a sign of France’s determination to resist the Tory plans to opt out of key EU legislation, Lellouche warned the French would attempt to reduce Britain’s EU budget rebate which will be up for negotiation during the next parliament.

He pointed out that France is a net EU contributor to the tune of €5bn (£4.5bn) , unlike Britain which receives a rebate.

“If we get a government that is ferociously anti European that will vote down this kind of legislation then I think the relationship is going to be very difficult. As we enter the next phase one of the issues we have to discuss midterm is of course finances. France is a net contributor to the tune of minus 5bn euros a year, of which 1.5bn is the same as British rebate. That should tell you quite a bit huh?” he said.

Cameron will be angered by the attack, and what it implies for Conservatives’ relations with the rest of Europe although in the short term he will be more concerned to ensure his strategy of abandoning a referendum on the Lisbon treaty does not provoke cries of betrayal on his backbenches.

Mark Francois, the Tory spokesman on Europe, reacted to the French attack by saying: “I am slightly bemused to hear the reported comments of my potential French opposite number, Mr Lellouche, given that a fortnight ago I participated in a very positive meeting which David Cameron had in London with Mr Xavier Bertrand, the chairman of the UMP. The meeting went very well and there was no sing of any concern on behalf of the chairman of President Sarkozy’s party”.

RELATED

1. Ian Dunt’s comprehensive report on parliamentery expenses, PMQs and on Lisbon Controversy including Cameron’s speech from 4:00pm. (Mr Dunt MEANT to refer to Sir ‘Christopher’ Kelly and the expenses report.)

2. Who Is David Cameron? Excerpt:’Today, he has backtracked from that referendum promise and is attempting to sugar the pill with some tough talk about how he won’t let those nasty Eurocrats tell us what to do.

In a cunning stroke, Cameron has managed to make himself look like a weasel and a windbag.

Handed the biggest open goal any politician could dream of – putting the hopeless, unelected Gordon Brown out of his misery – Cameron has today given an unpleasant snapshot of what life will be like under his Tories.

I’m sure I’m not alone in being unsure what Cameron stands for or what his policies are. Is he a Eurosceptic? What will he do about our national debt? Will he cut taxes? What will he do about crime? How will he extricate our forces from Afghanistan?’

---

ADDENDUM

 

Q&A Timetable on Blair’s (& Others’) EU Dream – How Soon Will They Know? Soon.

Comment at end

5th November, 2009

IS BALKENENDE A SERIOUS RIVAL TO BLAIR?

THE LADY’S NOT FOR TURNING … Her Head

The Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Jan Peter Balkenende has something in common with Tony Blair. Neither is a declared candidate for the EU presidency job. In fact Balkenende has denied his candidacy repeatedly. His coyness may have something to do with the other thing he has in common with Mr Blair. Both of them dread the humiliation of being rejected by The Lady.

(left) Jan Peter Balkenende, Netherlands Prime Minister, with Germany's chancellor Angela Merkel

Put aside whether Germany SHOULD have this power of patronage rejection or acceptance; the cookie seems to have crumbled that way.  Ms Merkel, far more it seems than France’s Mr Sarkozy (who also holds large voting power), realises her king-maker status right now. She is evidently playing it for all it’s worth.

Oooh, the intoxication that power wields…

… down, boys.

A kiss from Blair. Is Merkel playing hard to get? More than one undeclared "candidate" may be fighting shy of her rejection.

According to NRC Handelsblad, Balkenende is “more Chairman than President”. Merkel’s eyes, it suggests,  are turning more to a ‘chairman’ than to a ‘president’.

Jan Peter Balkenende

1. Today’s Telegraph says that Tony Blair has been calling Merkel & Sarkozy in fight for EU presidency

2. Who Is Van Rompuy? Thoughts and comments on the Benelux candidates.

3. The BBC’s list 0f 8 ‘candidates’

4. Dutch News: ‘Balkenende’s EU chances shrink‘

5. Reuters article by European Policy columnist Paul Taylor discounts Tony Blair but suggests we take our pick from 6 others. Mr Taylor has some interesting thoughts on Balkenende:

Taylor: “DISTINCT LACK OF ENTHUSIASM IN BERLIN”

“I wrote on this blog last week that Jan-Peter Balkenende … seemed well placed because he is a grey man with few sworn enemies in Europe. Balkenende supported the Iraq war, but not as actively as Blair. Dutch troops did not fight to topple Saddam Hussein. An independent inquiry headed by a retired judge is now investigating how the government came to support the war when its own intelligence service doubted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Balkenende has made coalitions with almost everyone, including the far-right anti-immigrant Pim Fortuyn List which entered parliament in 2002 after its founder was assassinated. His seven years in office have been marked by a sharp rise in xenophobia and Euroscepticism in the Netherlands. He lost a referendum on the EU constitution in 2005. He has made no notable contribution to the EU, nor shown any particular interest in European affairs. He did raise hackles, particularly with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, by promising parliament in 2005 he would win a 1 billion euro annual reduction in the Dutch EU contribution and negotiating stubbornly until he achieved that aim. That may explain the distinct lack of enthusiasm for his candidacy in Berlin.”

It depends. As far as this site’s favourite is concerned (Tony Blair) the UK Polling Report website reports this:

The full tables for ICM’s poll at the weekend are now up on their website here. It gives me a chance to go back and look properly at the questions on whether people support Tony Blair becoming the EU President. Up until now we’ve had some YouGov polls showing support and opposition evenly split, and this ICM poll showing a majority opposed. The reason for the difference is quite interesting.

ICM asked if people were in favour or against Blair becoming President of the EU. 36% were in favour, 53% were opposed, 11% didn’t know. In contrast, when YouGov asked they gave people the options of saying they supported Tony Blair, or that they opposed him and would rather the President came from another EU country (my emphasis). While support for Blair isn’t much difference between ICM (36%) and YouGov (31% and 38%), YouGov found much lower opposition to Blair.

It suggests the contrast is down to fact that people ICM is picking up everyone who opposes Blair, while YouGov only got people who oppose him so much that they would rather have someone from another EU state.

The above referred to the Times poll showing that 43% of Brits would say YES to Pres Blair. Also to last weekend’s Telegraph ICM poll showing Blair’s support at 36%. Disregard for a moment the provisos from UK Polling Report quoted above. Considering that according to some – “everyone in Britain HATES him”, I reckon 36% is a great start!

Click to CHECK for PRESENT BETTING  ODDS for First Permanent President of the EU

(position at 22:30, 4th Nov) – Rompuy – 6/4; Blair – 4/1; Balkenende 5/1 & Juncker 5/1. Compared to yesterday’s betting, Blair has moved up one place to 2nd favourite, and Balkenende down to joint third favourite with Juncker. (Yesterday, 3rd Nov  – Van Rompuy, from Balkenende, from Blair.)

Balkenende (wikipedia)

Jan Peter Balkenende (Dutch pronunciation: [ˈjɑn ˈpetər ˈbɑɫkənɛndə] ( listen)) (born May 7, 1956) is a Dutch politician of the Christian Democratic Appeal party and since July 22, 2002 the Prime Minister of the Netherlands. Currently leading his Fourth cabinet, which is scheduled to be in office until 2011. Balkenende has been mentioned for the post of President of the European Council. ^{[4] [5]}

Dutch government website

At my 7th October post  – ‘Why Europe may/should choose Blair as EU Council President’ a Dutch anti-Iraq war  commenter said this:

“I am from the Netherlands. And I know that Balkenende would be a very wrong choice to become President of the European Council.
In the Netherlands he has been absent in each and every crisis. Only when the opposition forces him to an opinion, he comes up with some kind of statement. He gives the impression of someone suffering from a clinical depression.
Beside this, he is a child! When he first met Bush jr., the former president of the USA, he behaved like a small boy that got a compliment of a headmaster. When he was patted on his shoulder by mister president, he was out of his wits from joy. In the Netherlands we made jokes about this, but we were extremely embarrassed. To please this Bush, he dragged us in an illegal war with Iraq. When the new coalition for his present government was formed, he demanded, that there would be no interrogation about this war. So we, the people, are not allowed to know what really let to this war.
A dutch soldier in Iraq fired his gun in the air during a riot. At that time an Iraqi male fell to the ground, apparently wounded or death, nobody knows. The same day an Iraqi male was buried. Maybe the same person, maybe another. The dutch soldier was arrested for murder by the dutch prosecutors office. Then there were endless trials against this soldier. In the end, each and every judge did acquit him from every charge and the dutch authorities had to pay him a great lot of money.
And now the big question. The Netherlands were in war with Iraq. During that war a soldier was attacked in the back by the dutch prosecutors office. Were was prime-minister Balkenende when this happened? This is of course a rhetorical question. He was were he is always when we need him: hiding in his tower, playing Harry Potter.
And now a question for the readers of this. And this question is NOT rhetorical.

Do you want such a person to be the leader of the European Union? Do you want Balkenende as your “president”?

I do not know if Blair would be a very good choice. But I have seen enough from Blair, that he would not abandon his own soldiers during a war that he himself choose for them. If you lead your soldiers into a war, you have to stand behind them, support them. As he once said:
“Backbone, not back down”.

Or in other words:
“Backbone, not back down, is what the European Union needs.”

There is no place in European government for a wimp and traitor like Balkenende. If his own soldiers can not rely on him, can we?

Yes, I realise this is only one man’s opinion. And I know too that that kind of anti-war leader opining can be found about Tony Blair too.  I did NOT realise though that the Netherlands too were in the midst of an Iraq war inquiry. So Blair is NOT the only EU leader who may be under the spotlight and asked to explain his role in that war in the next year or two. Nor did I realise that Balkenende did not take as principled a position on Iraq as did Blair.

The latter has always insisted, “I did what I thought was right” and “I would take the same decision again.”

Comment at end

A comment at the Ban Blair-Baiting petition (no 173) – “The best Prime Minister in my life time by far. Won Labour three elections and had to hand over to a charmless oaf but still better than being stuck with the horrendous spectre of a Plutocracy led by the slime ball Cameron and the rest of his filthy little gang, including the comedy voiced Mr Potato Head, William Hague, who Tony wiped the floor with. And as for little Georgie Osborne running the economy! Wake up Britain before it is too late and we sleep walk into another 18 years of despair.”

4th November, 2009

VAN ROMPUY is THE FAVOURITE

WHAT DO YOU MEAN – WHO HE?

A very famous Belgian

PRESENT BETTING  for First Permanent President of the EU – moved to Van Rompuy, from Balkenende, from Blair.

TOP LISTED 19 – ODDS at 23:45, 3rd November 2009. Not all of these candidates have declared their interest.

Herman van Rompuy

Belgium’s PM Van Rompuy enters race, by Bate Felix

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy has emerged as a possible candidate to become president of the European Union after former British Prime Minister Tony Blair lost his status as front-runner.

Van Rompuy, who became prime minister less than a year ago, is a low-profile leader but would be more likely to win a consensus among the 27 member states than a heavyweight statesman such as Blair, diplomats said.

The centre-right Van Rompuy, 62, came to power after a banking crisis toppled the previous government. He has been credited as a steady hand keeping together a difficult coalition.

“Rumours in diplomatic circles increasingly point to the Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy as the most likely candidate for the first European Union president,” Belgian newspaper De Morgen wrote on Tuesday.

“Van Rompuy’s stance as a man of compromise makes him a popular choice. Moreover he is respected for his low profile, careful and humble work ethic,” it said.

EU leaders want to appoint the bloc’s first long-term president and a powerful foreign policy chief as soon as possible following Czech ratification of the Lisbon treaty that outlines their responsibilities.

Sweden, which holds the EU’s collective presidency, has said it will call a summit of EU leaders soon to decide on the names of candidates to fill the top jobs.

“It will be a good opportunity, especially for Europe because I think we need a consensus builder, someone who knows how to mediate, a good conciliator seeing as we are 27 nations and could be more,” Anne Delvaux, a Belgian member of the European Parliament, told Belgian television.

EU member states, which could next grant membership to Croatia, have not named their preferred candidates openly.

Long-time front-runner Blair has failed to win the backing of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, denting his hopes of securing the job.

Blair’s chances have been hampered by his support for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. He also faces opposition because Britain is not one of the 16 countries that use the euro currency and is not in the Schengen area of visa-free travel.

Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, Luxembourg’s Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker and Former Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel have been cited among the possible contenders for the position.

I bet you can hardly wait to read the whole nine yards on the next favourite!

Whoopeee.

• Telegraph on Van Rompuy
• FT fun: Blair can write haiku too

Comment at end

3rd November, 2009

CAMERON: “TREATY REFERENDUM NOT NOW POSSIBLE”

“BRITISH PEOPLE LET DOWN” & “CAMERON BADLY ADVISED” & “CAMERON OUT, BILL CASH IN” say Euro-sceptic Tories

It’s been a fast-moving day.

No sooner had the Czech constitutional court decided that the Lisbon treaty was not counter to the Czech constitution than their reluctant president had signed and ratified it. Job done. Wheels off Cameron’s campaign.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus signs and ratifies the Lisbon Treaty today, 3rd November 2009. Now ALL 27 EU countries are signed up.

So here in Britain,  shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said  – (drum roll, purlease, people!! Watch here)

“The Conservatives will not hold a referendum on the EU treaty if they win a general election”

Mr Hague said ratification of the treaty by the Czechs – the last EU country to do so – meant the Tory campaign for a referendum “ends today”.  He also said that Tory leader David Cameron would set out details of a new policy on Europe on Wednesday … “not letting matters rest” etc.

But Mr Cameron did have this to say:

David Cameron: (watch video) - “It looks like this treaty will no longer be a treaty but will be part of European Law”

PARDON?

“IT LOOKS LIKE”?

What on earth did our soon-to-be PM expect? Did he have to wait until Klaus had signed before he realised it was going to be incorporated into EU law? Or was our Dave playing fast and loose with promises to the voters?

As if!

Meanwhile, over at Conservative Home they were advising Cameron to be quick in deciding what he was now going to say and do about his promised referendum. Now that all 27 EU states were signed up to Lisbon, Dave had better hurry before the bloggers, The Mail and the party members tell him his policy!  Civil war would be unfortunate right now.

But here’s a thought – if the Tories actually HADN’T realised what the legal position would be after ratification (from 1st December as it happens) – Gord ‘elp us!

RELATED

Gordon Brown congratulates Klaus on his ratification of Lisbon Treaty

• BBC – Cameron (video)
• BBC – Gavin Hewitt’s page & comments

Comment at end

3rd November, 2009

Blair cites pivotal moment for leadership to Madison audience

Peace envoy, former prime minister points to global change in talk at Drew University

By SALLY CAPONE

Staff Writer

Published: Nov 3rd, 8:11 AM

MADISON – In an ever-changing world where challenges and problems spread more quickly and affect more populations, there is still optimism for the future, said former British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the second Drew Forum lecture of the season.

“The world will be so much better for my 9-year-old son than it was for my father,” Blair told a packed house Friday, Oct. 30, at the Simon Forum on the campus of Drew University in Madison.

“It’s a tough time to be a leader – power is shifting fast from the West to the East,” he said, citing the growth in the leading economic nations from G-8 to G-20.

“The challenges are global – the solutions must be global,” he said.

Calling himself an advocate for peace, Blair, who served as prime minister from 1997 to 2007, touched on his role in the Northern Ireland Peace Process by helping to negotiate the Good Friday Agreement.

Middle East Envoy

He is presently working for the U.S., the United Nations, Russia and the European Union as the Envoy of the Quartet on the Middle East, helping the Palestinians prepare for statehood.

Blair highlighted four areas of global importance: alliances, China, security issues and the approach to difficult situations.

“We can’t rely on traditional alliances, and we have to strengthen existing ones like the Atlantic alliance between America and Europe,” he said, calling America and Britain two nations divided by a common language.

“We need to rethink alliances and also factor in the U.S. in relation to China and Japan,” he said.

Blair urged more focus on the Pacific Rim as well including India, Brazil and Russia.

“The world is changing fast.

“How they come to the table could have a dramatic impact on us,” he said.

In relation to China’s anticipated emergence as a world power, nations need to have a clear view of what they want, Blair said.

“We need to know where we are headed and why when China comes into their own and becomes a partner,” he said.

Security issues are even starker, Blair said.

“Do we take military action or reach out; we need both ‑ a wise combination of military force and diplomacy,” he urged.

Blair said he favors talking to Iran, but that Iran should not be allowed a nuclear capability.

The issue of peace between Israel and a Palestinian state must be resolved, and world leaders should help Palestine to statehood, he added.

“We have to be clear in our values and purpose,” he said.

Politics are either “open” or “closed,” said Blair, who led Britain’s Labour Party from 1994 to 2007, and is the party’s longest-serving prime minister in history.

“It’s as important as left versus right.

“Do we become isolationists or realize that the world is coming closer together,” he said.

Recalling his time as prime minister, Blair observed that the expectations people have of their leaders are impossible to satisfy.

“This is a really big moment that requires breadth of character and leadership,” he said.

‘Sincerity Of My Decision’

After his 45-minute remarks, several Drew University students asked questions, including Blair’s stand on the invasion of Iraq.

Disenchantment in Great Britain over mounting casualties and the conduct of the war led to accusations that Blair had misled Parliament, and to his resignation as both Labour Party leader and prime minister in June 2007.

“The intelligence on WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) was wrong, but (Saddam) Hussein was a threat ‑ the world is a better place without him and his two sons,” Blair responded.

“All I ask is that you understand my actions were taken on the conviction of the right thing to do ‑ respect the sincerity of my decision,” he appealed.

Asked if he would accept the position of president of the European Union, Blair declined to comment on his chances to become the EU’s first full-time president when it implements a recent treaty and moves away from rotating leadership.

While he said he would be the worst judge of his place in history, Blair said he has learned about leadership.

“It’s what you honestly believe is right,” he said.

“You are massively judged when you begin and then it broadens.

“I was more popular at the beginning,” Blair said, “but a better leader at the end.”

Comment at end

3rd November, 2009

Blair Foundation blogspot asks this:

Is former Tory party chairman Lord Tebbit a psycho or what?

"Is that a Cherie, a Tony or a Mandy?" wonders The Chingford Shooter. "The eyesight's as weak as the old brain these days."

SHOCKING news report, copied here in full.

From The Daily Telegraph
By Tim Walker
Published: 9:56PM GMT 02 Nov 2009
Lord Tebbit has murder in mind:

One wonders, not for the first time, if there is not a serial killer in Lord Tebbit fighting to get out.

The former Tory party chairman broke off from promoting his book The Game Cook to tell me of how he makes sure he never misses birds when he is out shooting.

“If I feel myself start to lose concentration and miss a few, the next time I see a hen fly over I say to myself ‘There’s Cherie’. If I see a cock, I say ‘There’s Tony’. If I am not sure what it is, then I say, ‘There’s Mandelson’. And then I know that I’ll kill ‘em.”

[BlairSupporter: Mr Walker of The Telegraph evidently feels nuff said.  He just leaves us with the thought ... er ... joke that the Chingford Shooter has just downed three unwanted birds.  I suppose Lord Tebbit meant it to be funny.

Ha, very ha.]

Known as he Chingford Skinhead on Spitting Image, Thatcher's "bovver boy" Norman Tebbit, often shot his mouth off.

But Blair Foundation Blogspot continues…

To be fair, perhaps when Lord Tebbit made that shocking statement he might have been drunk or ill or something. Whatever, I find his mindset extremely disturbing and upsetting, especially considering what he and his wife had to suffer and endure as victims of the IRA. Tony Blair spent the best part of a decade bringing peace to Northern Ireland and deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for doing so.

What is the reaction of tories and young aspiring politicians when they see a report such as this, do they just shrug and laugh it off? I am so disgusted by Lord Tebbit’s statement that it brings tears to my eyes and a feeling of revulsion, grief and disillusionment. I am not surprised that so many people, especially youngsters, do not care about politicians, politics, the state of the world and the moral fabric of British society.

In February, 2008, he said all boys should be taught how to shoot. There may be an argument that it might teach responsibility with weapons. But surely only if taught respect for weapons, and only if taught that fantasising about using the weapon on one’s political foes is NOT wise, not clever, not funny.

When I shoot clay pigeons (I don’t shoot real birds) I think of a flying clay pigeon. It works for me.

Young shooters under  the supervision of Lord Tebbit? Horrifying. The man’s an old fool. And a dangerous one.

‘That’s it, lads … follow the flight line … a little in front – BANG! Good shot! That’s Cherie gone. Now for the other two.’

More from the Express Feb 2008 report:

Lord Tebbit, a keen game shooter, said that taking boys out on shoots would satisfy their need for a certain amount of excitement and violence, while teaching them discipline and the ability to obey orders.

The Tory peer – who served in Margaret Thatcher’s administration as Norman Tebbit – told the Sunday Express newspaper: “Kids should go out on shoots. It gives them a sense of excitement – and kids, particularly young boys, have a need for a degree of violence.”

Hmmm…

Wonder where they get that ‘need‘ from?

These days this kind of transference of violent intent is the last thing we need.

• Labour’s ‘Progressive’ site: Ban Blair-Baiting petition
• ’society police help state demo rights civil cctv’ – (Rentoul inspired)

Comment at end

3rd November, 2009

An article follows by Stan Rosenthal at The Labour Party’s ‘Progressive’ site.  I will be interested to see just how much support it raises for Tony Blair. As the Iraq inquiry warms up, and it will, will those whose party he led for 13 years still hide away unsure if supporting Mr Blair should carry a health warning? Personally I find the absence of Labour party voices in support of Mr Blair not only worrying but frankly disgraceful.  Hardly surprising.  Many of his weak and cowardly party members were equally subdued when he needed their help in the “coup” of 2006.  The “coup” that led to Brown’s leadership … and the rest, in our recent, rotten, political history.

It’s clearly lonely as well as tough at the top.

I can attest to all the accusations Mr Rosenthal has made here on the vitriol piled onto Tony Blair (by the “deranged”) as though the former PM were evil personified.  I have never been able to understand how this abuse has been allowed to become so threatening and indeed dangerous. But it has been so permitted.  Put aside policy differences; they’re just policies. Civilised people do NOT call for death to politicians because of policy differences, no matter what such “civilised” people interpret as the end result of the policy.

Clearly this ‘police state/dictatorship’ isn’t all that accomplished when it comes to cracking down on the lack of restraint, balance, courtesy and responsibility shown by many journalists and their het-up commenters when it comes to Blair. This lack of normal human empathy has become the disgraceful hallmark of this country’s foul-mouthed online minions, bloggers, opining journalists AND commenters.

Ban Blair baiting (source here)

Blair-bashing is in full spate again, initially triggered by the setting up of the Iraq inquiry but more recently by Tony Blair’s possible bid for the EU Presidency.

Anti-war columnists have resumed dipping their pens into that special phial of vitriol reserved for our former leader and no utterance on these topics can be made without a torrent of abusive comments about the man following in its wake.

The intensity and persistence of the loathing is almost pathological with repeated calls being made for Blair to be hung at the Hague, tortured, assassinated, or consigned to Hell. As is the way with the deranged, the commentors (mainly at the Guardian’s Cif site) do not seem to get bored with saying the same things over and over again…

It now looks like this hate campaign (orchestrated largely in this country) has frightened off some of Blair’s friends in Europe and with the Iraq inquiry due to start in earnest towards the end of this month the Blair-bashers will soon be turning their attention to it again to land the fatal blow against Blair’s political career.

Every piece of evidence submitted will be carefully scrutinised for anything that can prove Blair was wrong.

Every scrap of damaging material will be inflated and, dare I say, sexed-up to fit their “Get Blair” agenda.  Newspapers, broadcasting channels, and bloggers will be competing with each other to discover the “smoking gun” that will finally ruin Blair’s reputation. And there will be no question of waiting for the Inquiry’s verdict before they deliver their verdict.

It was this scenario that prompted a group of fair-minded people to set up an online petition with the catchy title, BAN BLAIR-BAITING.

As it says in the preamble -

“Bear-baiting, whereby a tethered bear was attacked by a pack of dogs, was outlawed in this country in 1835. It is now time to stop BLAIR-baiting, i.e. attacks on our former Prime Minister by the dogs of anti-war. Less metaphorically it can be defined as the constant incitement of hatred against Tony Blair for taking us to war in Iraq.”

The preamble then points out that many people are already calling for the inquiry to be a trial of Tony Blair’s so called war crimes “except that unlike a normal trial Tony Blair has been presumed to be guilty in advance” and suggests that those who take this view should follow the same rules as a trial and stay silent until the outcome of “the trial” is known.

The petition itself reads as follows

“We, the undersigned agree that Blair-baiting should NOT be allowed to prejudice the outcome of the Iraq war inquiry. We therefore call upon the media and other interested parties to refrain from such activity for the duration of the inquiry.”

It has already attracted the signatures of John Rentoul (who has also blogged on it for the Independent), Oliver Kamm, Tom Harris MP and Sedgefield’s Paul Trippett and John Burton.  It has also been signed by people from all over the world. Some of their associated comments have been quite moving.

Here’s a couple from Iraq

1. “When Saddam’s people came to our village a nightmare became reality. Today ,my country is a changed place. But please do not leave us to the mercy of the suicide bombers. They are not true Iraqis or true Muslims. We are not ready for you to go yet. Not yet.”
2.” I am and my family are deeply grateful for the salvation from Saddam’s terror by Mr.Blair. I don’t understand why so many people attack him. He only wanted to help. He did not tell lies.  Saddam’s regime was as terrific (horrific??) as explained by Mr. Blair. It is easy for people living in the West to criticise. They don’t have to live here and don’t get killed by terrorists.”

from Afghanistan

“Our enemy is not Tony Blair but the Taleban”

from Bulgaria

“Mr Blair you are a true leader. You have stepped forth when all others have stepped back.”

from the USA

“No witchhunt!”

from Uganda

“Why are all eyes on Tony’s failures and no eyes on his achievements all over the world?”

from Ireland

“He should not be at the Hague but at Stockholm receiving the Nobel Prize for what he achieved in Northern Ireland”

from Iran

“I wish he was still in power and could help MY country. It is good to know that not all Western leaders are looking away but that some take actions. Be proud of your former PM, Brits”

If you agree that whatever the perceived faults of our former Prime Minister, Blair-baiting should play no part in the coverage of the Iraq inquiry  then I urge you to stand up and be counted by signing the petition.  Should you be worried about possible “repercussions” please bear in mind that you can sign anonymously and that your email address will not be shown.

P.S. To those who are poised to send in the usual Blair-baiting responses I say, don’t bother, you will only be proving my point.

Stan Rosenthal is a member of Progress

Posted by Progress Online at 3:54PM - Permalink

A message at Progress from Tony Blair

For more on Labour’s Progress/Progressive site please visit Julie’s website -  Against Mainstream Opinion

Excerpt from Julie:

You will notice that some familiar people have already signed the petition.

RT Hon Tom Harris Labour MP for Glasgow South

John Burton Tony Blair’s former Constituency Agent

Paul Trippett Vice Chairman at the Trimdon Labour Club

John Rentoul Journalist at the Independent

Oliver Kamm Journalist at the Times

Stephen Pollard Journalist at the Spectator/Jewish Chronicle

Sven Volmering of the German Conservative Party

Sign Ban-Blair-Baiting petition here