The Blair Project

Tony Blair, the former British prime minister who turned a once-progressive party into Tory-lite, is now in line to be the first President of Europe. Given Blair's central role in creating the conditions that invited Britain's financial collapse, this idea makes about as much sense as putting protégés of Bob Rubin in charge cleaning up after the mess that Wall Street made (whoops, that happened, too).

The new constitution for the European Union, unlike its current set of basic laws, provides for a strong president. After much delay, the proposed constitution is now likely to take effect because the Irish recently reversed their "no" vote. (In the current crisis, aid from the EU is helping to keep their economy from going the way of Iceland.) The last holdout, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, who doesn't much like the treaty, said Saturday that he would not stand in its way.

Blair is in need of a high-profile job, and President of the EU suits his ambition. But there seems to be remarkable forgiveness for the fact that Blair helped launch the race to the bottom in financial regulation that helped produce the financial collapse. Under Blair, the British Labour Party decided that the best way to fight Thatcherism was to go it one better and cut a deal with the City of London, Britain's Wall Street. Britain would become the global capital of unregulated hedge funds, private equity, and casino products like credit default swaps. In the U.K., this was known as "light-touch regulation." The bankers, in turn, would give New Labour their financial support.

The unit of AIG that helped take down the world economy was based in London, where it could enjoy even more feeble supervision than in George Bush's United States. Early in the present decade, whenever Americans began warning that finance was becoming dangerously speculative, defenders of business as usual solemnly warned that if we began regulating the affair, the show would move offshore to London, finance's new wild west.

Blair's notion was that it didn't much matter if Britain was losing its manufacturing economy. The City of London, as the center of the world's deregulated money market, would carry Britain. Well, it carried Britain to collapse. The aftermath of Britain's bubble economy today is a bigger disaster even than its American counterpart.

Blair also helped wreck what was once a proud left-of-center party. Progressives have been systematically purged from New Labour. Under Blair's successor, the dour Gordon Brown, Labour's popularity is now at a postwar low, setting the stage for a Conservative comeback despite the fact that the Tories offer nothing more in the way of solutions than do the Republicans in the United States.

Much the same thing happened in Germany a few weeks ago, where a Social Democratic Party (SPD), which had abandoned social democracy a decade ago in favor of neo-liberalism, turned in its worst electoral performance in six decades. If you wonder why left parties are not making any gains from the worst crisis of capitalism since the Great Depression, you need only look to the British Labour Party and the German SPD. They have nothing to offer.

Why, then, is Blair likely to be the first President of Europe? Because he is just what Europe's ruling financial elite wants -- nominally a man of the center-left who can be trusted to continue business as usual.

There are alternatives to Blair, but they are long shots. One is Joschka Fishcher, the well-respected leader of Germany's Greens and Germany's former foreign minister in the late SPD-Green coalition government. Another is Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, the former Danish Social Democratic prime minister who is an actual social democrat as well as Europe's leading advocate of real financial reform.

Politically, however, the failure of nominally center-left parties that emulated the center right has undercut the appeal of genuine progressives. The more likely scenario that could spare us Blair is that leaders of several of Europe's smaller member nations are not quite sure that they want such a high-profile figure, and a compromise candidate could be a functionary or a less visible leader from a small country.

Despite the fact that modern Europe is generally friendlier to a managed form of capitalism than the US, the Blair project reminds us that real reform is not likely to originate in Europe any time soon. That puts even more pressure on Barack Obama to get financial reform right.

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect, a senior fellow at Demos, and author of Obama's Challenge.

 

Comments

[knosiswar]

Javier Solana will be the EU president, it has been written.

[Kaviraj]

This Colgate lapdog of the Bush admin and the banks, big business and other assorted exploiters of the populace is the least qualified of all. If he becomes President of the EU, i predict riots and general mayhem. The mayhem will consist of another economic crisis witin the next few years.

In the US, the fact that banking people like Geitner and Summers have been put in charge shows that the foxes are guarding the chookpen. It is high time the populace of both behemoth federations - US and EU - get off their collective lazy behinds and demand accountability to be implemented immediately.

As long as we allow war-mongers and Big Business sycophants in office, we the people will be duped on purpose.

[HansB]

Blair, no way. The elite may stand far from the populace, but they don't want a riot on their hands. There is already a sense that the treaty process was engaged to circumvent the NO votes on the EU constitution. Choosing Mr Iraq War - or Mr "New Europe", as Rumsfeld would say - would add insult to injury. It would be a direct slap in the face of all European electorates: "we don't give a damn about your opinion, we do as we please."

And even if the EU council members are selfish, that still wouldn't mean they want to be chaired by an arrogant bully whose defining characteristic is total indifference to civilian casualties, as long as he himself can party with rock stars.

In fact I doubt any British candidate would do, considering the number of opt-outs from the EU process by the UK. As a Dutchman living in France, I would definitely take issue with any decision reached under a British presidency which imposes obligations on me, but not on the British. And if that president is also called T. Blair, I would consider the decision despicable, shameful and illegitimate.

[Peter Noble 2]

That puts even more pressure on Barack Obama to get financial reform right..
This opinion piece about Blair and the collapse of Leftist political parties, was as we say in Britain: bang on!
Sadly the last line betrays an almost parochial but charming faith in a President who in less than 9 months has destroyed all hope.
It's the height of American arrogance to rightly condemn Blair for his mendacity and to imagine Obama merely has to do the right thing. Obama would not know an ethical or moral position if it was hand delivered by God. We voted for change but Goldman Sachs made clear votes mean nothing and verily Obama mistook this greed and theft for a parable of hope.

Blair and Obama serve the same beast. Nothing will be done unless it pleases the Oligarchs of banking.

[EndRacismNow]

Agreed. American leftists don't like Blair because he allied himself with Bush to have illegal military campaigns. But they don't know much else about him. Blair attends Bilderberg conferences and is the puppet of international bankers just like Bush and now it would seem Obama is cut from the same bolt of cloth. The Left/Right spectrum, that the media pushes very hard for people to subscribe to one ideology or another, is in place to keep people confused. Liberals blame conservatives for all their country's woes while conservatives blame liberals for everything. In the meantime, transnational corporations and international banks can do just about anything they want with little criticism from the media. People can't see that while in power the two parties have virtually the same policies. When you label yourself one or the other faction of politics you tend to get all your information from ideological sources that will propagate that political point of view. And the outcome is a mass brainwashing. So you have either people who are indifferent or people who believe everything the left or right wing media feed them. The financial collapse showed that is isn't just Republicans that will defend corporations and banks at all costs. We have a Democrat president, congress and senate and they showed who their true masters are. The same masters as the Republicans.

[holeybuybull]

Who knew that being a war criminal could be the path to further political success and enrichment?

[FearlessFreep]

They say Dick Cheney may run for president.

[missouriwatcher]

If he "won" (there's no way in Hades that he would), he would probably move the entire WH into his underground bunker where he hunkered on 9.ll, and for quite some time afterward.

[Macready]

well said holeybybull

[ianrthorpe]

If Tony Blair becomes EU President (which is an honorary post really) it will preciptiate the break up of the EU so deeply disliked and mistrusted is the man who put blatanty the interests of the Bush Administration before those of the nation he led.

http://greenteeth.blog.co.uk/2009/10/19/government-by-fear-and-panic-7201160/

[stuporman]

how can obama get financial reform right when his advice comes from geithner, summers, and shapiro?
america and europe are all headed down the path of corporate world rule.

[ArianaP]

Tony Blair's remarkable (is it unprecedented) disdain and disregard for Her Majesty's Parliament and Cabinet,
His desire to exercise power from his lounge with only a few close (and unelected) cohorts present,
His well-documented secrecy and the media 'spin' of his friend Alastair Campbell,
His close relationship with Rupert Murdoch (they are documented speaking 6 times; three times in the 9 days before the Iraq war),
His erosion of civil liberties with authoriarian legislation and increased police powers,
His being the first British Prime Minister to have been formally questioned by those same police,
His role Blair with investment bank JPMorgan Chase in a "senior advisory capacity",
How are these appropriate qualifications and experience to lead my European Union?
I cannot support his nomination.

[JohnTy]

His action over the Iraq war - and in particular the divisive role he played on the European stage with Rumsfeld - should disqualify him.

[EndRacismNow]

It sounds like he is a perfect candidate for the criminal EU. What is the EU for? It destroys national sovereignty of 1000 year-old nations to centralize power with the European central bank. They control one currency as opposed to the many currencies controlled by their respective countries when Europe wasn't united. When you control a nation's currency you might as well be King. So Blair, being a Bilderberger establishment elitist, would do exactly as he is told but the international bankers. All these elitist, whether they pretend to be left or right wing, all have the same goal in mind and that is world government. They aren't even hiding it anymore because they control the majority of the media. So when nationalists see that it doesn't matter which party they put in power in England or America and they call out these elitists for a globalist New World Order conspiracy, they are just called lunatics by the press and the majority of the public pay no attention. Obama is controlled by the same people. That's why whenever we elect someone who is supposedly 'progressive' or 'conservative' they never keep their promises that they made during the campaigns. They waffle in the middle to confuse people while pushing a corporatist world government agenda that benefits the super elite.

[Kaviraj]

The waffle that countries controlled their own currencies is a blatant error. The Bank of England, die Deutsche Bank, de Nederlanse Bank, La Banque de France are all owned by Rothchild. The populace of the EU is against the EU and the Euro, but the few countries that put it to a referendum all voted against. France, the Netherlands and Ireland all said NO!

I wonder if the present so-called yes of the Irish was an honest referendum. Karzai is not the only one manipulating election outcomes, rest assured. The elites want their agendas implemented, come hell or high water. Civil liberties have been eroded steadily in the EU and it does not bode well for the future.

The fact that of 27 member states only a few put it through a referendum, coupled to their resounding NO, shows that they do not want a repeat performance in all EU countries and refused second referenda in France and the Netherlands, to avoid being confronted by the facts. It is only a matter of time before the Europeans wake up and bring out the guillotines. We are not as passive as Americans, as our histories show. The sooner that happens, the better.

[hglindquist]

"Why, then, is Blair likely to be the first President of Europe? Because he is just what Europe's ruling financial elite wants -- nominally a man of the center-left who can be trusted to continue business as usual."

Bullseye!

And Blair will compromise towards the power of the financial elite .. politics is the art of politics, right?

It is until the people take to the streets.

[hglindquist]

Oops!

... compromise is the art of politics, right?

[outnow]

Unfortunately, center-left is busiiness as usual. That rings true in America as well, as noted by the author. Bringing back Rubinomics is Obama's greatest mistake. The EU should not elect Blair. Just because the collective elites want that, it should cause everyone else to be on their guard.

Only the Czech president is now resisting the Lisbon Treaty. Soon, nations will be rendered to nothing and a banking order will replace the kings and queeens. That will spread across the Atlantic and reassert control. In fact, if you view Obam as an extension of that control, it already has.

Nobody I spoke to in Europe had even read the Lisbon Treaty as late as last year. They hate Blair and call him a war criminal. Well?

[josephXY]

Blair was popular with some of the media. And it's true that he allowed the financial markets
to go berserk. However, the media hype, without which the financial crisis would never have
come to what it is, is over. People are learning. And there is nothing much such a President
can do.
What the financial experts / pundits said at the height of bubble was practically everywhere
the same. This flashback video is a good example for what fueled the frenzy all over the place:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

[Jannsmoor]

As usual, excellent and insightful post Mr. Kuttner.

[Jannsmoor]

Under absolutely no conditions should Tony Blair be given a position of power except as a peace envoy. He was an utter failure as a PM and amounted to little more than a George Bush water boy.

[EducatedObserver]

Space does not allow me the luxury of replying appropriately to Mr Kuttner's melodramatic statements against Tony Blair, a complex politician if ever there was one.

What I can say however, is that Robert Kuttner's all-to-simplistic attack against the former British PM is well beneath the intellectual prowess that the co-editor of a significant publication of political thought - left-wing though it may be - would normally be expected to demonstrate.

For starters, the nomenclature "President of Europe" which Mr Kuttner uses so liberally is fairly meaningless and (perhaps intentionally) misleads the readers of this publication into thinking there exists a similarity of office with the US presidency.

[northstar11]

what is so complex about blair-----he is another lying politician ------good talker ,nice smile ---but underneath ---nothing new.

[FearlessFreep]

"Space does not allow me the luxury of replying appropriately..." Or saying anything meaningful.

[George59]

One definition of 'deceive' is 'to cause to err'. Blair persuaded the British tories to back his war on Iraq with false information. He caused them to err and so he deceived them and the British Parliament. This is his greatest achievement , because he remained PM. His ability to deceive lmportant people (including possibly himself) on important matters should disqualify him from the Presidency.

[JohnTy]

Blair did not persuade the British Tories to support the Iraq war - at that time they were led by a right winger who was keener on the war than Blair was - if that is possible. The people who Blair had to persuade were his own Labour party - many of whom were very sceptical. For the record the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish Nationalists stayed resolute in opposition.