The life of a poodle is often underrated. As dogs go, many enjoy the most
pampered of existences and are smart enough to do the most intellectually
demanding of tasks.
Poodle owners are often passionate about their pets, catering to their every
whim, manipulated by their guile and tolerating their sometimes snippy
relationships with other dogs. In many cases – and this is not restricted to
poodles, of course – it’s hard to tell, after a while, who controls whom.
The master routinely finds his days wrapped around catering for the poodle:
walking it, grooming it, pandering to it. If the tail often wags the dog,
the dog can also wag the human. And often does.
I’ve never understood, in this respect, why calling a British prime minister a
poodle of the president of the United States is therefore always to the
detriment of the Brit. Most postwar British prime ministers have intuitively
understood this, however strongly their publics have sometimes balked. The
global power of a British premier is nowhere near that of an American
president, but the Brits’ leverage over such power is arguably greater than
any other country’s – precisely because of their treasured, special,
pampered poodle status.
Any number of Europeans would have loved to have had Margaret Thatcher’s
direct line to the White House in the Reagan years, or Macmillan’s in the
Kennedy years. De Gaulle, of course, was insanely jealous. Labour prime
ministers have been no exception: Wilson was an avid Atlanticist and Blair
has made Thatcher seem positively sceptical towards American power.
Recall Thatcher’s horrified response to what she saw as a breach of
international law in the seizure of Grenada, a member of the Commonwealth,
or her opposition to Reagan’s attack on nuclear deterrence theory at
Reykjavik – and compare it with Tony Blair’s take on international law with
respect to Iraq. Britain’s leaders – from Thatcher to Blair – do not seem to
be moving away from the American orbit, but more firmly into it.
In this respect, the idea of Blair becoming the Bush administration’s point
man for the Israel-Palestinian conflict is a new level of integration in the
special relationship. I can’t think of another example anywhere of a
foreign, former prime minister subsequently becoming, de facto, a member of
a US administration.
Yes, Blair would formally represent the “quartet” of international powers. But
everyone knows that the US is the truly responsible party, and that the job
is Bush’s to appoint or veto. Everyone also knows that Blair would be unable
to achieve anything without close White House support and consultation. He’s
essentially headed to join the cabinet of a foreign country.
No, Blair is not becoming a US secretary of state. But neither, alas, is
Condoleezza Rice. In the struggle for mastery of American foreign policy in
the Bush administration, Rice has long been beleaguered by Dick Cheney, the
vice-president, and Donald Rumsfeld, as defence secretary.
North Korea policy in effect has been delegated to Christopher Hill of the
State Department. Iraq and Iran policy – along with the detention, rendition
and torture question – is still dominated by the Cheney cabal. Bob Gates,
the new defence secretary, has helped reduce the monopoly of influence
Cheney has had in the Pentagon. But General David Petraeus, for all his
bipartisan appeal and background, is there to enforce Cheney’s policy in
Iraq, not the Democrats’. And Rice is still struggling to shift the Bush
administration out of its bunker and into a more mature and subtle diplomacy
with the international community.
In the view of some, Blair’s addition to the team might be the tipping point
in favour of Rice. Ignoring the Israel-Palestinian question has, after all,
been central to the Bush administration’s Middle East policy for six years.
Blair has long argued against this, and lost. But his near-pathological
loyalty over the bungled Iraq occupation – a loyalty apparently only
deepened by the Bush administration’s refusal to take any advice he ever
gave – has given him the essential quality Bush demands in anyone he relies
on.
And so he may take his place on the Rice-Gates side of the seesaw and try to
tip the balance. He may be part of a new strategy that shuts Guantanamo Bay,
reenergises the Middle East “peace process”, deals with Iran through tighter
sanctions, and pushes for gradual redeployment in Iraq under the banner of
Petraeus’s counter-insurgency strategy.
Or maybe not. A more jaundiced view does not see Blair’s possible appointment
as a sign of anything but a sop to Blair’s ego and a clever device by Bush
to give himself political cover in his final 18 months as he tries to step
up and prolong the war in Iraq.
The Israel-Palestine problem is not exactly at a fruitful juncture, after all.
The Palestinians are in a civil war; jihadism is increasingly replacing
Palestinian nationalism as the reigning ideology in Gaza and the West Bank.
Shi’ite and Sunni powers are both vying to influence the internal
Palestinian conflict; and Arab-Muslim hatred of Israel has rarely been more
intense.
Blair’s job is arguably a hopeless one. Think of dealing with the Israelis and
Palestinians as the American equivalent of the British government’s historic
task in dealing with the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland
during the worst of the Troubles. At best, thankless; at worst, a waste of
time. Bush is asking Blair to become his equivalent of a Northern Ireland
secretary.
Domestically, Blair would also be a weapon for the Republicans to use against
the Democrats. See – we’re back to diplomacy, the Bush Republicans could say
(while doing all they can to prevent a funding cut-off for the war in Iraq).
Blair’s support for the Iraq war was critical in persuading many centrist
Democrats, especially at the elite level, to support the war in 2003.
Coopting Blair now would give the Republicans extra insurance against
Democratic attacks on Bush’s foreign policy in the next election campaign. I
wonder, for example, if Blair has consulted the Clintons on this possible
job offer. I can’t believe they’d want him to take it.
Blair, of course, sees the job as a kind of nicotine patch for power
withdrawal. The glamour! The sense of importance! Peace on earth! Whatever
admiration he might lose from the liberal part of the American domestic
scene would be more than made up by increased Republican fervour.
If you doubt how lucrative that can be in terms of speaking fees, look at how
much Rudy Giuliani has raked in by exploiting 9/11 for the past five years.
He routinely got six-figure sums for a single speech – and has tens of
millions to show for it. You can almost picture Cherie drooling over the
potential financial bonanza.
But what makes this perfect for Blair is the combination of almost certain
failure, the patina of altruism and a sense of global self-importance. You
can surely see the appeal. A former British prime minister with the
authority to negotiate and settle a central dispute in the Levant? Think of
it as Suez’s revenge.
And that’s why, for all the pitfalls of such an appointment, it’s hard to see
why it would be bad for Britain, or bad for Gordon Brown. It gets Blair out
of the way and makes Britain seem more important on the world stage.
Poodling is a much more powerful tool in global power politics than preening
like the French or pouting like the Russians.
Nobody should underestimate the leverage of a little island attached to a
continental hyper-power. Last week, for example, Fred Thompson, the new
frontrunner for the Republican nomination, tried to appeal to his party’s
conservative base by going to London. London? The man is from Tennessee,
trying to appeal to fellow Southerners. Why on earth would he go to Europe?
He went because in the slough of despond in which American conservatism now
finds itself, no living Republican can bestow any sort of legitimacy on an
untested candidate.
So Thompson chose to bathe himself in the aura of Margaret Thatcher, a
grocer’s daughter from Grantham who used to represent Finchley in
parliament. An elderly British lady has the power and image to shift
perceptions in the US Republican party at the high water mark of American
global power.
Some poodle. Some leash.
The article takes an odd approach to exposing the truth. Many Americans, especially conservative Americans, think of Britain as "Mother". We worry about Mum. We listen to Mum and we usually do what Mum wants because let's face it, Mum is better at diplomacy and intrigue than we are. I don't think that Tony Blair is a poodle on an American leash so much as America is tied to the UK by very old pair of apron strings. And, to tell the truth, I have no problem with that.
Don, Houston, USA/Texas
france and russia? surely u dont think frances "golden age" includes the slavics?
for all your criticism of the US you certainly forget the reliable bias and pretention of the western europeans
james, Manhattan,
Anti-US hatred? The double negative means love for US? I am always easily confused anyway.
sgodil, Miami, FL
My hat is off to the commenter from Texas, who said precisely and succinctly what I would have taken a 1,000 words to say, that all English speaking cultures face the same perilous threat, so I will steal, copy and paste his words for emphasis. As a person who lived in other countries for 14 years and travelled globally in my job for another 14 and worked with nationals from all cultures, I have no illusions that we Americans are smarter or wiser than other people. We do have, even ill-educated Americans, an instinctive understanding of our rights of individual liberty and a willingness to help other countries trapped by their centuries of failure. In today's world, you ought to, but won't, get over your inferiority complex and work to forge an alliance of all English speaking people. No room to place his comments here. Told you I was wordy. I'll file again.
Meritorious_Soso, Commonwealth of Virginia, USA
Repeating Mr. Bailey's statement for emphasis. He is 100% correct. Get over your anti-USA hatred: A great American patriot (Ben Franklin I believe) once said " We must all hang together or we shall indeed all hang separately". Today this applies to the English-speaking peoples of the world....the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, and even NZ, the RSA, and Ireland. These are dangerous times for civilization, regardless of time zone. We in America seem to understand this intuitively and do not mind sharing our power and influence with our British cousins. WE do not consider Blair or any other PM a "poodle".
Larry Bailey, Ft. Worth, Texas / USA
Meritorious_Soso2, Virginia, USA
America will do the most insane things and yet Britain's PM will stand smile and say something that conceivably calm the British fears that England is not part of America.
Yet my question is when did England join America? When did it become logical or better to hitch your wagon to Americas. As a private, as private as that may be, citizen here in America it has always been a wonder to me that Britain doesn't follow a course uniquely your own.
So wake up Britain we Americans have a group of madmen in office that has done nothing but destroy everything good and right. Leaving nothing for any one to build on.
Which is practically a first. I wonder what damages that You former PM has left for your Now PM Gordon Brown to fix?
Dennis, Nazareth, Pennsylvania USA
Pretty much every empire that has disintegrated has been quickly folloowed by the state that founded it. Britain nearly went that way but managed to pull itself up and become a global power once again. It says a lot for the way we have worked to stay afloat. I am sure that once America goes the way of the other empires, Britain will still be there strong and proud and hard-working.
Poodle maybe. But highly intelligent and with very sharp teeth.
paul, london,
Blair is the man who refused a ceasefire during last summer war in my country (Lebanon!).... how could he possibly be given such a job?!
Georges Khoury, Beirut, Lebanon
War is peace; Freedom is slavery; Ignorance is strength, Blair is Envoy.
Phil, Hong Kong,
"I’ve never understood why it's bad to call Mr Blair a poodle of the president of the United States"
Because it is supposed to humiliate Britain from being an Empire to the reputation of a poodle. I think Britain can once again be Great, if they would learn not to follow orders (from US/Israel) but give them.
Mohammed, London, UK
The people in the arms industry ,could not have picked a better
man for the job
A Walton, Leicester, England
Just because the poodle is close to the master does not mean he will get any more attention.
Blair could yap as much as he liked but G.W. would just say "Yo Blair" and ignore his advice completely.
This is no more and no less what Britain can expect from any US President.
As to Blairs new job? A waste of time. You cannot have peace in the middle east until you have settled Israel/Palestine and Iraq. you need Israel to negotiate in the first and for the Americans to give up on Iraq's oil in the second. No chance.
Jeff Larsen, Chch, NZ
Well that qualifies Bliar for this position then. He has never in the 10 years in power solved or had a situation come to fruitition.
anon, UK, UK
I was amazed to read Simon's Jenkins comments in this Sunday's News Review 'Toasting Tony' (Sunday Times 24th June). To conclude that "Britain under Blair was, above all, a smiling place" is a bewildering view in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and innumerable articles by Mr Jenkins over the past 10 years.
A few examples of why Britons find it hard to smile:
- Britain is facing the worst terrorist threat since 1945, partially as a result of policies persued by Blair (including an "illegal war" as denounced by the UN);
- personal debt is at an all time record;
- violent crime, especially by teenagers is at an all-time high;
- virtually every measure of welfare shows Britain in a poor light when compared with other developed countries (health, children's wellbeing, social mobility, alcohol abuse, the educational standards of poor chidren).
In addition, there are millions of Iraqis whose lives have been destroyed or blighted.
Geoff Dribbell, Loughton, England
Andrew Sullivan is a famous gay writer who promote the sexual orientation around the world and I suppose the right to do what you want in your life without receiving blackmails by terrorists (i.e.you can smoke cigarettes if you want; make love with who you want; write beautiful letters and e-mails; speaking freely and living with respect your life in a democracy).
If Tony Blair want to resolve the poverty and avoid wars, and promote human rights around the world, he will be considered an idealistic and a dreamer.
But every politician must be a dreamer and a honest man.
Loris Borsetta , Mortegliano Udine , Italy
Wow - Blair as the mid east peace enoy! what a joke. He didnt want to solve the problem when he was the prime minister how /why is he going to solve it now. Also whats the point of all this any how - the only one that can solve this issue is the US. They should force the Israelis to withdraw to pre-1967 borders. But this will never happen - atleast in our lifetimes. So in the meantime Blair will shuttle around getting air miles while Bush tries to figure out ways to attack Iran. Sorry Arabs ! its not going to get better anytime soon.
YKhan, London, England
Putting your poodle in charge of the relationships between your neigbours ensures that your neigbours problems will not get resolved, and that is what Blair is supposed to do (or not to do!). Then Bush can give the illusion of an action while Cheney and Co. can fill up their botomless pockets with all the US tax payer money. That's the nature of the 'Special Relationship', unfortunately it is mostly one way towards DC.
Kay Salicornia, San Jose, USA
Duncan - try reading the news and try to understand the situation. The Israelis have placed restrictions on the movement of Palestinians because of the security risk. Do you have any idea as to how many Palestinians have been caught either on the way to or on the process of planning a suicide mission? Although the Palestinians as a whole are not terrorists, Israel canot risk being lax when it comes to its security. Katushya rockets continue to fall on a daily basis on parts of Israel. When the extremist Palestinians, Hizbollah etc stop attacking us and using their children either as sucide bombers or as human shields, then Israel can allow for a greater movement of Palestinians.
Tony Blair has done a great job and he will be greatly missed.
Chris, London,
Of course Blair has been subservient; but he had little choice. One of the first things George Bush did in 2001 was to send a political enforcer to tell Blair to keep in line. And you may remember Monsanto's blackmail of Michael Meacher over GM foods. That's a felony in both countries, but Monsanto was never prosecuted. And the recent extradition rules are grossly unbalanced. These things show that the USA has been exerting crude political intimidation. Why do you not investigate and report this?
Roderick Rees, Woodinville, Wa
Andrew Sullivan talks a lot of sense about US politics and society but his claim that de Gaulle was insanely jealous of British links with the US is bizarre. De Gaulle had extremely prickly relations with the US and Britain going back to WWII. Though he had the sense to recognise that there was a freer world the Free French should join in the war, he was never after his own poodle-like relationship with the US or he would never have done so much to annoy Roosevelt, and as a post-war leader he would not have taken France out of NATO's military command structure or have vetoed British membership of what was then known as the European Economic Community.
Barry Stocker, Istanbul, Turkey
The French and the Russians have been scheming and plotting for a "golden age for Europe" it seems. Ahh, so much for the plotting and scheming - Russia is a pale shadow of its former self and it gives a damn about Europe being golden or what ever.
France - well Sarkozy just got elected -some one who is more closer to the US than any other French pol. The French after seeing how miserably the social welfare state has failed in energizing the economy have elected a conservative who must now go about the tough task of making France golden before Europe gets better - unless of course if the French think that if they are better than Europe automatically gets better !
NS, Chicago, IL, USA
The usual anti-Bush-Blair-Isreal bleatings. They are so boring now! Can you please think of a new fad to move onto?
Who would you, the 'blame USA for everything' mob, like as our next superpower? Iran? Russia, perhaps? What about China? Ask yourselves how they would behave in command of the world?
It's just not PC to like America any longer and you hate Israel even more since the Palestinians started slaughtering each other - after Israel pulled out, of course!
I hope Tony Blair gets the job and I hope, with all my heart, he succeeds. Peace is peace, no matter who secures it, but you, the so called liberal elite, would much rather see him and the USA fail just to keep yourselves amused. Far more important than peace in the Middle East, eh?
I would like any American friends reading this to consider that the liberal elite in Britain are not representative of the Great British public. Most of us are happy and proud to be your friend but you won't find us on these pages.
ST, North West, England
The party that increases the level of Inheritance Tax will stand a good chance of Power at the next election.We pay taxes all our life how much more are we to pay?
David McCallum, Glasgow, Lanarkshire
What a colossally dumb piece of writing.
A complete waste of effort, really.
John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada
It depends on who the owner is...and in this case, the poodle has more intelligence.
H.Stanton, London.,
Whatever happens to Blair after he has betrayed our interests so often, I don't care. But just getting him out of Britain for a longish time, whatever he is doing, sounds good to me!
Davy Crockett, Phuket, Thailand
Poodle is good ? I suggest you listen to a few Frank Zappa CD's......you just could change your mind about poodles.
Lemmy Nothor, Barcelona, Barcelona
How could anyone advocate such a demeaning position.? This writer shows no respect for his own country. No wonder Britain is a country in some unrest.
judy, Liverpool, england
You are overfed on sour grapes, aren't you?
Felix, Mountain View, CA/USA
TO PROFESSOR CHARLES HART of Neptune Beach, Florida
Please do not think that Florida is a good representative of the rest of the United States. It is not. I can assure you that in my area of the SE, there are many people who follow cultural & social events as well as political events in Britain. We may not be up on everything or know the slang or have intimate details of which figure is doing what, but we take notice when something is going on. It matters. You're like a cousin. Granted, not as close a cousin as a century ago, but still a cousin. There are still a lot of people here who are descended from British ancestry. And we still speak the same language (almost).
We don't feel that you can tell us what to do, though. We draw the line there.
I find it very interesting that Fred Thompson went to London. I'd love to know who he met with. I think that's important. It's obvious that the Republicans have close ties with the British.
J. Rhinehart, Spartanburg, usa
"Nobody should underestimate the leverage of a little island attached to a continental hyper-power."
But why attach to a more distant continent, when our own continental mainland is just a few miles away?
I am happy to regard myself as, first and foremost, a European. I am not, and never wish to be, an American.
Doc M, Glasgow, Scotland
Thatcher was never called a "poodle" precisely because she publicly and privately expressed strong disagreement with the US on matters such as Grenada and the Falklands. Blair has no such backbone.
RV Kennedy, Manchester,
A great American patriot (Ben Franklin I believe) once said " We must all hang together or we shall indeed all hang separately". Today this applies to the English-speaking peoples of the world....the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, and even NZ, the RSA, and Ireland. These are dangerous times for civilization, regardless of time zone. We in America seem to understand this intuitively and do not mind sharing our power and influence with our British cousins. WE do not consider Blair or any other PM a "poodle".
Larry Bailey, Ft. Worth, Texas / USA
"Poodling", as you call it, may be Blair's way of getting what he always wanted in the Middle East. And using Bush to do it.
J. Rhinehart, Spartanburg, USA
Don't be surprised if in the next couple of years if Tony Blair is appointed the secretary of state. He is very popular over here in the States. Whichever party it may be, Republican or Democrat. They all very much admire his skill and diplomacy. Washington has a future for him here. He is not a poodle but a tough bull dog.
Glyn James davies, Hopacong, New Jersey USA
Poodles are soooooo cute and do as they're damn well told:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfEA1SV8k20
Dion Per Sona, Cardiff, UK,
Why is it that British politicians think they have a special relationship with the U.S.? It is common knowledge they make snide remarks about Americans being ignorant of the world outside their country. I can assure them they are equally ignorant.
British influence ended with the civil war and the subsequent influx of immigrants from other countries who had little respect or knowledge of the U.K.
It is true that without President Reagan's supply of air refueling tankers, the British Harrier jets could not have reached the Falklands and that war would have been lost, but Americans generally have mixed feelings about the Brits, admiring their accent and the BBC, but little else.
As an Anglo-American I face this every day.
In my 40 year sojourn in this country I have never detected a "special relationship". That would suggest to Americans that they are still subservient to the former colonial master! God forbid.
Professor Charles Hart, OBE, Ph.D, Neptune Beach,Florida, U.S.A.
Sit Fido, sit. Good boy.
WP, Washington, DC
Yes, Blair is no poodle. By the logic of this article, if he was, Bush would treat him better.
DB, Illinois, USA
Yes, hard to see where Blair will be of any help in the Middle East peace making process. His poodle status and association with the aggressive, bully boy foreign policy of the US has damaged the reputation of the UK. Palestinians and the general Islamic population, distrust and dislike Blair and the British as a result of Blair's poodle status.
Down with poodles and poodle lovers, bring back the British Bulldog!
Greg, Fortaleza, Brazil
Yes, a Poodle should live a life of a poodle, not a human being! Yes, I agree with you. I am living in England over 10 years and realise the mentality of the English like you, or you may be an Irish decent, cannot be changed. I think largely because of Education, education and education. Look at around the world how Bush and Blair, THE POODLE have created the world chaotic. You must be stupid and very English.
Cheers Poodle!
Chan, London, UK
This piece just proves the poor state of American education.
You can get a "PhD" without understanding much.
John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada
I'm in favor of ending US governmental aid to all countries. Americans should donate to international nonprofits like the Red Cross instead. Egypt should do more to prevent shootings in Gaza. The Egyption government must stop the flow of heavy artillery to Hamas. Gaza residents were Egyption citizens before the Six Day War, and their old government should help patrol the area.
Joseph, NYC, USA
Even if “poodle†status has some benefits, the ignominy of simply being a “pet†as far as world economy and international politics is concerned is distatsteful. No, on balance I would prefer to be an independent mongrel rather than a pampered subjugated poodle any day.
Adrian Ryan, Donegal, Ireland
Robert Fisk in yesterday's Independent speaks for a lot of people when he says that he is stupefied by the suggestion that Blair should be given this role.
Fisk must be right when he says that Blair is totally discredited in the middle east. His involvement would continue to tarnish the reputation of this country after the disaster in Iraq.
Also let us not forget that his negotiating abilities are very poor as evidenced, for example, at the recent EU summit. The only thing he is really good at is revealing his vanity.
Marek, London,
No-one as biased towards the Israeli government as Blair is could ever bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
That could only come if a US President cut off all financial aid and arms sales to Israel and made it clear none of it - and no sales of spare parts - would be resumed until Israel's government starts treating Palestinians like human beings.
As for Blair's influence with the Bush administration - what influence? If the British government makes it clear that it will support any American administration no matter what then American Presidents will simply ignore our governments' views - as they have done.
Duncan McFarlane, Carluke, UK
You are wrong, sir. The French and Russians are scheming and plotting, not preening or pouting or jumping through hoops for beef treats. They are planning a golden age for Europe.
Shirley Jackson, Oliver, BC, Canada