Blair: 'When the shooting starts, are you prepared to be there?'
"A U.S. government source in Europe acknowledged that while “there may not be a whole lot of smoking guns strewn around,” there may be some recent “overhead”—i.e., U.S. satellite photos—that could make the case at least “look more compelling—sort of along the lines of Dean Acheson at the U.N. during the Cuban missile crisis.” " (We avoided war in that case)
The Lonely Summit
Bush and Blair will meet this weekend to finalize plans for selling the world on military action against Iraq. It’s a going to be a tough sell. A Web exclusive by Stryker McGuire
By Styker McGuire
NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE
Sept. 6 — On Monday, the Royal Navy’s flagship, the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal, steamed out of Portsmouth harbor. The ship was headed for a long-planned NATO amphibious exercise in the Mediterranean, but could, said its commander, be detailed for real-world military action if need be.
NEITHER HE NOR anyone else could ignore the mounting drumbeat presaging an invasion of Iraq. FAMILIES FEARING WAR BID ARK ROYAL SAILORS FAREWELL said a front-page headline in the Times of London the next day. Just hours later, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said during a televised press conference that the time had come to “deal with” Saddam Hussein—and that the problem isn’t America’s alone. “This isn’t just an issue for the United States. It is an issue for Britain. It is an issue for the wider world. America shouldn’t have to face this issue alone. We should face it together.” On Saturday, Blair arrived for a Camp David summit with George W. Bush to do just that.
“This isn’t just an issue for the United States. It is an issue for Britain. It is an issue for the wider world. America shouldn’t have to face this issue alone. We should face it together.”
—For Blair, who spent much of last autumn helping Bush assemble a coalition in support of the war in Afghanistan, it is coalition-building time again. This time, his job will be much tougher, not only abroad but at home. The globe-girding solidarity of September 11 is history. For now, Britain is the only world-class military power solidly backing Washington on Iraq. And in Britain and the United States, new polls show declining support for a war against Iraq. Backbenchers in Blair’s own party are especially restive. Elsewhere in the world, opposition is the rule. “It’s much, much higher stakes for him this time,” a senior U.S. diplomat in Europe tells NEWSWEEK.
At the White House and Downing Street alike, a summer of disarray on Iraq has given way to determination. Following a phone conversation midweek, Bush and Blair announced that they would hold their war summit at Camp David. And Bush, ahead of his speech at the United Nations on Sept. 12, says now he will “consult” the United Nations and will not rule out new weapons inspections in Iraq under the right conditions. Today, in back-to-back calls, Bush phoned the leaders of Russia, China and France to make his case for military action against Iraq. Blair, meanwhile, began making plans to visit world capitals to lobby further. His first announced stop: Moscow, to see Vladimir Putin, who could play a crucial role in the Iraq drama.
Blair has said that he will soon release a “dossier” of Saddam’s evil deeds, similar to the indictmentlike document that his government issued in October 2001 against Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. But in Europe, it is difficult to find anybody who thinks that there is much evidence against Saddam that hadn’t already been detailed. “The intelligence we have gives no reason to change our assessment of the threat,” said German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder on Wednesday. Donald Anderson, a Labour member of Parliament and chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, says he is “rather skeptical about [the dossier]. It will be very difficult to produce anything that will be very compelling.”
The senior U.S. diplomat wonders, too, whether Blair’s case will change the minds of America’s traditional allies.
“It’s going to be very difficult for the governments to make the case that we have to strike next month to prevent Iraq from acquiring additional capabilities,” says Gary Samore, a senior fellow at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies and the author of an IISS dossier on Iraq and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) being published Monday. “I don’t think it’s very difficult to prove to people that Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction. I think it will be difficult to establish what exactly is the status of the program now. I suspect that the best arguments the governments will be able to make is that the longer you wait, the greater you risk that he [Saddam] will use them [WMD].”
Newsweek International September 9 Issue
Others are less pessimistic, if only slightly. A U.S. government source in Europe acknowledged that while “there may not be a whole lot of smoking guns strewn around,” there may be some recent “overhead”—i.e., U.S. satellite photos—that could make the case at least “look more compelling—sort of along the lines of Dean Acheson at the U.N. during the Cuban missile crisis.” And Blair’s inner circle believes that when the case against Saddam is presented clearly and coherently—however new or old—the fence-straddlers and skeptics among the party and the public will come over to their side, along with now balky but usually friendly governments.
Blair’s support for Bush is a huge political gamble, but one he seems determined to make. In a BBC interview to be broadcast Sunday, the prime minister is asked whether he agrees with the assessment of a member of President Lyndon Johnson’s cabinet that Britain has to pay a “blood price” to preserve relations with Washington. Blair replies: “Yes. What’s important, too, is that at that moment of crisis they don’t need to know simply that you’re giving general expressions of support and sympathy. They need to know: when the shooting starts, are you prepared to be there?” If nothing else, Bush knows that Blair is ready.
© 2002 Newsweek, Inc. |
