Mr. Tony Blair says...

I'm feeling idle, so I'll just post a couple of pointers to Blair's specific ideology on war.

Firstly, it's interesting to see that some MP's are planning to impeach Mr. Tony Blair for 'high crimes and misdemenours' in taking Britain to war.

Further, of note, is that I first heard the speech these excerpts are taken from live on BBC News 24 - the subsequent analysis and the reports that followed barely scratched the surface of this speech - focusing almost exclusively and shallowly on whether it meant war in Iraq (it did) - and almost no mention of the money shot. Not even in the left-press. Here goes.

These are excerpts from Tony's Speech to the George Bush Library, Texas. I recommend reading it all for yourself. Money shot at the end.

...in the two views of international affairs. One is utilitarian: each nation maximises its own self interest. The other is Utopian: we try to create a better world. Today I want to suggest that more than ever before those two views are merging...

...I advocate an enlightened self interest that puts fighting for our values right at the heart of the policies necessary to protect our nations. Engagement in the world on the basis of these values, not isolationism from it is the hard-headed pragmatism for the 21st Century...

...It's still costing us time, effort and money, but it's a lot less than if we had turned our back and let the Balkans plunge into civil war...

...So today, more than ever, "their" problem becomes "our" problem. Instability is contagious and, again today, more than ever, nations, at least most of them, crave stability. That's for a simple reason. Our people want it, because without it, they can't do business and prosper. What brings nations together - what brought them together post September 11 - is the international recognition that the world needs order. Disorder is the enemy of progress...

...So the promotion of these values becomes not just right in itself but part of our long-term security and prosperity. We can't intervene in every case. Not all the wrongs of the world can be put right, but where disorder threatens us all, we should act...

...The point I am making is simply this. There are no Cold War battles to play to. 'Spheres of influence' is an outdated concept. A series of interlocking alliances with a common agenda on issues of security, trade and stability should replace old rivalries...

... I am arguing that the values we believe in are worth fighting for; they are in the ascendant and we have a common interest in standing up for them. We shouldn't be shy of giving our actions not just the force of self-interest but moral force...

So far, so good. Blair's concern is that in a post cold-war world, there are no sphere's of influence, only a globalised security interest that coincides with human rigbhts values and the economic interests of the main powers. But, here comes the money shot:

...Fuel is our economic lifeblood. The price of oil can be the difference between recession and recovery. The western world is import dependent. We base our policy on diversity of supply. You in the US import from 50 different countries, no one of which supplies more than 15 per cent of total imports. The EU pursues roughly the same policy.

So: who develops oil and gas, what the new potential sources of supply are, is a vital strategic question. We have the best energy companies in the world. Yet I don't believe that collectively, we have a sufficient strategy for ensuring that the political and corporate world co-operate together in ensuring the diversity of supply continues or in our policy towards energy.

The Middle East, we focus on naturally. But the Caspian, Russia and Angola will be vital sources of supply in the future. Sorting out the problems - for example conflict resolution in Angola which accounts for some 7 per cent of non-OPEC US imports - is not time wasted. Neither is collaboration on research for the fuels of the future or for greater fuel efficiency. This generation may not thank us for it, but our children's generation will.

So, there we have it, in a speech ostensibly about justifying military interventionism, a brief discussion about securing oil supplies, and ensuring diversity of supply, and ensuring that certain people do not and cannot act to either threaten that supply.

This is irredemably third way, the illusion that you can marry principles/values and capitalist self interest - an illusion France and Russia have already sought to dispell through their actions.

he is right, the world is increasingly integrated, but a common interest is not shared yet.

I believe that this speech is a key to understanding the Iraq war, and Tony Blair's foriegn policy. I think it's a vital historical document and the source for plenty of good debate around it's terms. I think it stinks that the craven media didn't treat the serious intellectual content of this text, and so political debate, vital issues are unexamined, except within the hallowed halls of the elite or those with time on their hands in the afternoon to watch News 24.