Tariq Ali
As
the future ripens in the past, so the past rots in the present. American leaders
have long been used to treating the cracked British vase as a pisspot, but
Attlee and Wilson, while dutifully kissing ass in the White House, did, at
least, attempt to restrict and restrain the United States, albeit with little
success. Blair and Cook and the rest of this dreadful gang seem to be only too
delighted with any new opportunity to bark their support for the imperial
war-monger in the White House, bombing Baghdad to show his toughness to electors
at home and recalcitrants abroad. Blair’s argument that the new bombing was
necessary to protect the lives of British pilots is incredible.
What
the hell are these pilots doing in Iraq in the first place? Why have they been
bombing Iraq for the last ten years? Over the last two years alone, the USA and
Britain have dropped over 400 tons of bombs and missiles on Iraq. Blair has been
raining down deadly explosives at a rate twenty times greater than Major. No
other country in Europe supports this fire-storm. The bombardment of Iraq has
now lasted longer than the US invasion of Vietnam. Blair , Cook and the entire
Government are so used to the stench of their own hypocrisy that they can
justify anything. No doubt Lord Macdonald will soon be telling viewers that the
bombing raids were necessary to defend the democratic rights of the
military-industrial complex to maximise profits, without which nothing can work
and, therefore, if we want a better system of privatised transport in Britain we
must understand the bombs are necessary. The brazen opportunism of New Labour
culture appears to be reflected in the Labour Party as a whole and has affected
its capacity to think critically.
The
orthodox casuistry among loyal columnists and courtiers is to justify
inconvenient realities—–Israeli possession of nuclear weapons and colonial
brutalities inflicted on the Palestinians, Turkish oppression of the Kurds, the
clerical dictatorship in Saudi Arabia, etc. —— with a breathtaking cynicism.
Thus Blair’s Personal Assistant for Foreign Affairs, ex-diplomat Robert Cooper
writes on P.42 of ‘The Post-Modern State and the World Order’ that: ‘We need to
get used to the idea of double standards.’ He also informs us casually that ‘the
reasons for fighting the Gulf War were not that Iraq had violate the norms of
international behaviour’, but the need for the West to keep a tight grip on
‘vital oil supplies.’
Together
with the bombing, the sanctions regime kept in place by Clinton and Blair ands
now Bush and Blair, has cost the lives of, taking the lowest estimate, 300,000
children. As the jets take off again for yet anothere bombing raid on the
shattered and famished remnants of a Third World Country, why is the Labour
Party so silent. A country mobilised for war by shameless demagogy can in a more
disillusioned mood become vulnerable to other and more consistent demagogues.
Dissent that refuses to be a spectator, but insists on wedging itself into the
forbidden zones of modern politics is vital as a physic for any functioning
democracy. Dissent in Britain has become atomised. It reflects a hostility to
all traditional politics and is confined to single-issues related to the
environmental and animal rights. Most of these deserve support and yet something
was missing. I wonder whether those who were extremely upset a few years ago by
the cramped living conditions in which calves were shipped to slaughter-houses
in France ever spared a thought for the number of children who died in Iraq from
malnutrition and lack of medicine as a direct result of the inhuman sanctions
policy imposed by Washington and London. Time to wake-up folks.