OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 2, n.º 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 147-150
Critical Review
Blair, Tony (2010). A Journey. London: Hutchinson: 718 pp.
by Evanthia Balla
PhD in Political Science and International Relations by the Catholic University of Lisbon,
M.A. in European Studies by the University of Reading, UK and M.A.
in International Politics by the Université Libre de Bruxelles,
Assistant Professor in the Law Department at the University Portucalense
Researcher at OBSERVARE (UAL) and at the Instituto Jurídico Portucalense.
Since the day Tony Blair left office, in June 2007, he has never really been away from
the spotlight. This is mainly because the constant controversy around the 2003 Iraq
war remains intact and questions over the motives and reasons behind Blair´s decision
are still seeking an answer.
Today, after a deliberate period of silence, Blair ´s memoir A Journey offers him the
chance to say and explain
1
.
Indeed, the book includes testaments over various events from his private life, such as
the devastating feeling after the loss of his mother to whom he had a special
connection or the surprising relationship with alcohol.
But as far as the politician is concerned, his book seems to be a personal account of a
leader in a certain period of time, his vision and decisions, an instrument to preserve
his legacy, justifying the war against Iraq, and staying loyal to New Labour.
Blair writes about his first day in office. He was inexperienced but determined to make
a difference. Since the beginning, he created a personal warm relationship with the
people of Britain, in particular after Princess Diana´s death, when in his speech really
captured the public mood.
But this relationship between Blair and the public was not to last long with the false
prospectus of the Iraq War, which marked the lowest point of his popularity.
After the publication of Blair´s memoir, the British newspapers concentrated mostly on
his rivalry relationship with Gordon Brown. Alongside Gordon Brown and Peter
Mandelson, Blair was indeed the driving force behind New Labour. However, it was not
until June 2007, the end of Blair´s premiership, that Blair would finally give way to
1
Kettle, Martin. “World exclusive Tony Blair interview”, The Guardian, Wednesday, 01.09.2010. Available
at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/01/tony-blair-a-journey-interview Accessed on:
31.01.2011
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 2, n.º 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 147-150
Critical Review
Evanthia Balla
148
Brown. And Brown in fact had worked with strong political skills to ensure that there
would be no rival for the succession.
Although domestic politics figure notably in Blair´s book - the 1997 labour party
campaign was fought almost exclusively on a domestic policy base - is his foreign policy
that really defines Blair’s decade in office, from 1997 to 2007. And it is his controversial
performance in the world scene that really captures the mind of the reader abroad.
Blair admits my awakening on domestic politics took place over time. Probably I only
fully found my voice on domestic reform in the last term. The awakening on foreign
policy was, by contrast, abrupt. It happened over Kosovo.
2
This successful military
intervention was to influence his subsequent decisions on Sierra Leone, Afghanistan
and, crucially, Iraq.
Blair is a liberal interventionist. He does not withdraw anything he said in his Chicago
speech, on 22 April 1999, and its liberal interventionist doctrine of international
community.
3
Starting from the reality of interdependence in an age of globalisation, a
world where events in a faraway place can have immediate effect on our national
security, he argues that intervention to bring down a despotic dictatorial regime could
be justified on grounds of the nature of the regime, not merely the immediate threat to
national interest.
Yet, the Blair doctrine has challenged notions of national sovereignty and non-
interventionism principles going back to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. And it
appeared to justify the approach to Afghanistan and Iraq in which battle was to take
place at a different scale. As a result he knows that his historical legacy is likely to be
most closely linked to the ultimate outcomes of those wars. Therefore, he devotes a
considerable amount of space in his memoir to defending military adventurism,
especially in Iraq.
I have often reflected as to whether I was wrong. I ask you to reflect as to whether I
may have been right.
4
The book contains lengthy passages on 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York and
Washington. For Blair this was definitely a war, a war that had to be fought differently
from any other. Precisely, it was an ideological battle, the mores and modus vivendi of
religious fanaticism versus those of an enlightened secular system of government that
in the West, at least, incorporated belief in liberty, equality and democracy.
5
Blair does not proclaim that he did not fight for the British national interest. But, what
he claims to be the focal point of the foreign policy of our days is globalisation. He does
believe that the defining characteristic of today’s world is its interdependence; and that
unless we articulate a common global policy based on common values, we risk chaos
threatening our economic and political stability.
And in practice, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in New York and Washington, 11/03/2004
in Madrid, and 21/07/2005 in London, prove clearly that terrorism can knock our doors,
claiming thousands of innocent lives with no previous notice.
2
A Journey, p. 223
3
Blair, Tony (1999). “Doctrine of the International Community”, Speech at the Economic Club of Chicago.
Available at Downing Street website: http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page1297 Accessed on: 10.02.2011
4
A Journey, p. 374
5
Ibid, p. 346
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 2, n.º 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 147-150
Critical Review
Evanthia Balla
149
For Blair, the enemy has to know that we are determined to act. This drove his policy
drastically in Afghanistan and as well as in Iraq.
To win in this way would not and does not require simply a military strategy to defeat
an enemy that is fighting us. It requires a whole new geopolitical framework. It
requires nation-building
6
. […] it had to be fought on the high ground – our values
versus theirs […] Like it or not, from then on, we were in the business of nation
building.
7
To the question is Iraq better now than in Saddam´s time, Blair answers: of course. In
1979, when Saddam took the power, Iraq was richer than Portugal. By 2003, the
population was dependent on food aid, by 60%. Today, GDP per head in Iraq is three
times that of Iraq in 2003.
8
However, Blair does not address critically the practical challenge of nation-building. He
simply reasserts that the price must be paid in the battle against terrorism and radical
Islam. Though he showed courage in the Iraq war, the war itself has been a failure.
Indeed, there was no legitimising reasoning behind the endeavour, nor from the United
Nations (UN) neither from the public opinion. There were not found Weapons of Mass
Destruction (WMD) in the possession of the Saddam regime. And definitely there was
no planning for the aftermath reconstruction and stabilisation of the country. The Shia-
Sunni gap has been wider across the Muslim world. The situation in Iran has been more
aggressive too.
In addition, the case for a new international community is strong and Blair has often
put it clearly. There have been some notable successes, as in Sierra Leone and Kosovo.
But this community will only come into being if pursued through example and
persuasion, not through war. Subsequently, the attempt to impose Western values on
distant states through armed force is doomed to failure.
Blair in his memoir admits that there was not an active WMD programme in Iraq as
they thought, yet he repeats the same arguments as to the reasons why he still would
do the same thing, such as the tyranny of Saddam regime, the international law
violations, the security threat to his neighbors and the world.
The books shed little light to Blair´s feelings over the resignations and the hundreds of
thousands of people who marched in protest in Britain and across the world. The list of
those who disagreed with the invasion and occupation of Iraq was long, including
personalities who fought for personal freedom and justice for years, like Nelson
Mandela.
I finished reading his memoir still thinking of Tony Blair as an enigmatic leader.
Enigmatic, as one can be easily inspired by his values and his philosophical conceptions
about modern politics, but at the same time one can be profoundly disappointed by his
unquestioning acceptance of US policy and interventionist approach in Iraq.
For Clausewitz
9
moral courage and determination is what makes a great strategist.
Blair had both, love him or loath him.
6
A Journey, p. 349
7
Ibid, p. 357
8
Ibid, p. 378-379
9
Clausewitz, Carl von (1984). On War, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
ISSN: 1647-7251
Vol. 2, n.º 1 (Spring 2011), pp. 147-150
Critical Review
Evanthia Balla
150
In the end, his Journey was definitely as much a triumph of the person over politics as
was a triumph of the politics over the person.
10
How to cite this Critical Review
Balla, Evanthia (2011). Critical Review of Blair, Tony (2010). A Journey. Londres:
Hutchinson: 718 pp., JANUS.NET e-journal of International Relations, Vol. 2, N.º 1, Spring
2011.
Consulted [online] on date of last visit,
observare.ual.pt/janus.net/en_vol2_n1_rec2.
10
A Journey, p. 691
