E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Chris Hampson, NBC Director of International News
It's a story as old as history. Two young dreamers meet. They share the same hopes, the same ambitions. Their friendship blossoms into something rather deeper. Lovers, of sorts. Success comes their way in bucket-loads.
Then it all goes very, very sour, and the accusations fly thick and fast. Intimidation, lies, disaster.
As kiss-and-tell memoirs go, Tony Blair's new book – "A Journey" – is a real smacker. (It's also estimated to have made Mr. Blair an estimated advance of around $7 million.)
It's not that it tells us many things we didn't already know. It's his candidness.
On sex scandals, on the Royals, on his need for a strong drink or two.
The Queen was "haughty," Princess Diana "a manipulator," President Clinton not "so very different from most men," he writes.
Jeremy Selwyn / Pool via AP, file
Gordon Brown and Tony Blair in London in 2005.
And behind the curtains of Downing Street a war was going on.
Not between Mr. Blair and his wife (so far as we know), but between the Prime Minister and his powerful Chancellor Gordon Brown, the man who eventually succeeded him.
They were, Blair writes, "a bit like lovers."
We all knew about the rivalry between the two, and the deal they made 16 years ago that Blair would get the first crack at the top job.
Blair says he knew it would test them: "I was scared of the unpleasantness, the possible brutality of it, the sadness, actually, of two friends becoming foes."
But not that scared, at least not any more. Just like any other couple whose love turns sour, Blair's book delivers some brutal views on Brown that will likely finish their friendship for good.
He says he knew Brown would be a "disaster" as Prime Minister (he went on to lose the next General Election).
His rival, while "brilliant and strong," was "maddening" and "difficult" with "zero emotional intelligence."
But he didn't sack him because it was better to keep him "inside and contained" rather than "outside and let loose."
Blair says he wrote his book because he's got "something to say." Even before publication it caused controversy when he said he would give the proceeds to armed forces charities. "Blood money," said his critics, referring to Iraq.
The war gets its own chapter, in which Blair admits to shedding tears over the loss of life. But he maintains the decision to invade was right.
He talks too of arguing with Princess Diana a month before she died, of the night of the accident and his subsequent uncomfortable meetings with the Queen.
"I spoke, with passion, of the need to accept life's lessons," he writes. "I worried she found me presumptuous – she was a little haughty."
Blair describes the 691-page memoir as a "letter to the country I love."
Though it's not, he admits, an objective account.
"There is only one person who can write an account of what it is like to be the human being at the center of that history, and that's me."
Maybe. But Gordon Brown has yet to get around to writing his. Bring it on.
Leave a Comment:
The war gets its own chapter, in which Blair admits to shedding tears over the loss of life. But he maintains the decision to invade was right.
Here's where the whole Bush/Cheney masterminded the Iraq war falls flat on its face, how do you get Tony to buy in? Whats in it for him? Nothing! This war was started with the best of intentions by men who believed in what they were doing was right, not just for the U.S. and Britain, but for the world and in the long run that still may be the case, time will tell. That's not to say mistakes weren't made in the execution of the war, but shame on all those who politicized this for their own personal political gain, and likely at the expense of our troops and capital by emboldening the enemy, who was sensing the division in our political leaders.
I just love this guy, him and his cousin George Bush. The finest individuals to run the US and the UK at the same time since Thatcher and Reagan. The combination doesn't get any better than that. Although the combined results of their respective policies were somewhat disastrous, the world did not end. Gotta love this guys.
Both Tony Blair and George Bush should have been charged with treason for what they have done to their respective country's. There is Blair in his book stating that George Bush was a smart man and he admired him for the "immense simplisity in how he saw the world". Hmmmm ! I say that this simplistice view comment was a nice way of calling Bush an "Idiot". That Bush had a simplistic view of the world is exactly what his problem was and appartntly Blair shared that same view. No President of a powerful country like the United States should have a simplistic view of the world. Both of these men are equally pathetic.
......Anna exactly my thoughts!
How about Kennedy getting the USA into Vietnam, Treason? FDR pulling the USA into World War II. Seems Presidents have put this Country in harms way many a times . Maybe there is more to it than what we know.
Why do we still have 38,000 troops in South Korea? Troops in Germany, Japan, Turkey The Philippines. Places were the people really don't want our troops? Perhaps we should just bring all the troops home.
How about Kennedy getting the USA into Vietnam, Treason? FDR pulling the USA into World War II. Seems Presidents have put this Country in harms way many a times . Maybe there is more to it than what we know.
Learn your American history before you make comments on a public venue. It was Eisenhower who originally sent troups to Viet Nam, not Kennedy. Ummmmm, did you miss the part where Japan attacked the U.S. territory, at that time, of Hawaii?? Were we supposed to have said to Japan "Oh, that's ok. We don't mind you killed hundreds of men and destroyed millions of dollars in U. S. property. Go on with your plan of world dominance, we don't mind. Afterall, we ARE in the western hemisphere and what you do won't matter to us."
Anna-19....., Is our world safer today with Obama at the helm, NOT AT ALL! North Korea and Iran are playing Obama like a cheap fiddle. No one respects us anymore, certainly not our enemies. Obama and his policies have done nothing to turn the sentiment of feeling toward our country in a favorable way. And by the way, I really could give a crap if anyone likes us or not, but I sure do want them to respect us, and that is slipping too.
We share secrets with the Brits that inter-departments inside our own gov't don't share. We've no idea what deals were struck in the "special-relationship," between the Brits & US. You can bet safely, with the Brits being our only allies in the go-it-alone strategy at the start, that the Brits struck some really good deals for their heavy involvement in the war. In 50 years, after all the secrets acts expire, we'll get to know just what the politicos did that gets them so powerful, rich, and famous -- off the honor and backs of soldiers, both sides of the pond, that they send to war on their bidding.
Nobody could have said it better than Anna-1974015! I totally agree and we would not be in the mess we are in now if Iraq would have not been invaded for WMD's. It is an outrage.
Of course in the picture, you have ole Cheney pulling the strings behind Bush too.
Jeane Johnson,
Biden in 1998 was saying the Saddam had WMD and had to be removed.
WJC stated on December 16, 1998 from The Oval Office - 6:00 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: "Good evening. Earlier today, I ordered America’s Armed Forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical, and biological programs, and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States and, indeed, the interest of people throughout the Middle East and around the world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons."
Or these earlier remarks from WJC:
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” President Bill Clinton. Feb. 4, 1998.
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” President Bill Clinton. Feb. 17, 1998.
“In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now — a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.
If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.” President Clinton Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff February 17, 1998.
For more Quotes from DEMOCRATIC Leaders supporting the WMD belief and the need to invade Iraq see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1960175/posts
To the average british guy Tony Blair was a puppet with a few strings shorter than the other....He didnt really do much...However his ability to be precise and consistent while in power has proven to some to be a memory not lost by many....His George Bush admiration I find to be by the book as down the line their they were related...I dont remember Bush saying much(as he should never) while in the room with Blair, and his visits were mostly to probably party....but Blair writing a book was to be expected this is what all men in power do....Im just amazed at the amount he was paid 7 million ...WOW
Anna,
Excellent comments!
Anna -- you got that exactly right, it's how the Brits insult someone, esp., an American (who miss the irony). They say things like "Oooh, do come back to see me," meaning the exact opposite. Blair's simplistic view comment is a euphemism; just British irony -- substitute"simpleton," spot on.
As I grow older, life becomes a series of disappointments. I thought Tony Blair was a pretty smart guy, but boy, was I disappointed. I thought George Bush was pretty dumb, though, and I wasn't disappointed. So I guess it evened out. I'll read Mr. Blair's book, but it already sounds like a white wash for his administration.
It seems there is a segment of our populus that just don't give a damn that BUSH, and Blair, LIED our two countries into war and got thousands of Americans, British and Iraqis killed and spent trillions at a time we could not afford it. Doesn't the fact that they lied and our soldiers were killed matter???? If not, then I suppose anytime a president or prime minister wants their country to go to war over whatever then all they have to do is lie to their country and not have to worry about the consequences. They lied and got a free pass.
Those segments you so eloquently talking about, either directly benefited from those lies or just don't have enough info about the conflict.
Callous, heartless, n evil ppl lied n sent other ppl's children to die in unnecessary war. Blair, Bush II, their minions(neocons) etc. should prosecuted 4 war crimes n mass murders. Diz devils schemed from da get go -- Warmongers should b held accountable n punished! There r some sick, gullible, n asinine posters in here who r still don't get it n support da war criminals. Im afraid there r more dan quite a few of diz Bushies n Blairites da countries.
Either Blair was stupid about the real reason for Bush's Iraq war, or it is just another lie to cover it up.
Bush even said in Britian in 1999 that if he got the chance he would take Saddam out. After all he did try to kill my Daddy.
We got all those good men and women killed and maimed because Bush wanted reveneg on Saddam for Saddam's 1993 death plot on Daddy Bush.
Everything else claimed were lies built up by Cheney to justify the war -- a war that would enable his business associates to enrich themselves. Bush wanted Saddam. Cheney wanted big bucks for his buds.
And if Blair did not know this he was even dumber than most people thought.
One has to remember that one man can make a difference. Saddam Hussein, left alone, would have annexed most of his 'friends' and enemies. Believing his sh*t was ice cream, once he had absorb as much as he wanted, he would have gone after Israel. The weapons he would have employed would have ended live as we know it. Just like Neville Shute’s novel. Kiss your arse good bye. Former President Bush and former Prime Minister Blair knew what the future held for the world if this clown was allowed to run loose. Like Mr. Churchill, they knew their enemy. You can pay now or you can pay later. They had good consult. They did the right thing. Freedom isn't free. Ben Franklin said it best, "Those who give up precious liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security."
So why didn't US and British say anything when he used Gas Against Iran and Kurds, in fact they encouraged him. I agree on Israel with you and that is the problems , We went to Iraq not cause Saddam was bad man, we went to to help Israel. Nothing in it for American what so ever at all. Now the same warmongers drumming up lies to get us involve with Iran.
Yes Freedom is free and you don't have pay for it. Who ever give you that idea is just trying to take your freedom away. In fact all those names you mentions took us to the wars that we didn't need to be involve.
Tony Blair was the biggest disaster to fall on his feet in British politics; he lied lied and then lied some more alongside his one eyed Marxist back stabber Brown who were both cheered on by their politically correct and infantile communist supporters.
Team Blair deliberately trashed Britain and sold the British people into European slavery without the common cutesy of asking us to bend over first, we no longer make our own laws we no longer control our own borders our capital city may as well be re-named Mogadishu and whatever political system there is still left running in this overcrowded @!$%# hole of a country it is infested with pigs hunting for truffles and gangsters looking to invent more ways to mug the British people.
Blair was and still is a traitor to Britain and I now know the reason why he struck down the laws governing treason.
I bet Satan cant wait to get hold of this odious creature and I say a pox on all their houses.
In published reports: "Catholics in Britain have raised questions about Blair’s conversion, citing among other concerns the Blair government’s stands in favor of lax anti-abortion laws, embryonic stem cell research, adoptions by homosexuals, and same-sex civil unions."
John Smeaton, director of Britain’s Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said, “We need to hear a full repudiation from him. Without one, having Blair as a Catholic is like having a vegetarian in a meat-eating club. It simply does not make sense.”
Lots of Catholic don't agree with all conservative positions of the Vatican. Just because he's liberal, doesn't mean he can't be Catholic.
Anna makes the most sense. Thanks, Anna. My thoughts exactly.
Tony is in the pocket or Zionist groups. He has become a mouth piece for state of Israel. His justification for going to Iraq is directly contradicts British military actions against Argentina. Miss Margaret Thatcher order British navy to take atomic bomb with them in case they need to used it. These folks are just hypocrite and they use anything in their disposal when ever they have too.