The Thin Edge
Feb. 27th, 2003 09:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
libertangoHere's something that I haven't seen much in US papers: The fragility of Tony Blair's government.
The Financial Times reports today that yesterday, 122 Labour Members of Parliament voted in support of a resolution declaring that the case for war against Iraq is "unproven".
According to Parliament's own figures, that means Blair's majority has shrunk from 165 to 43 -- a loss of about 3/4.
Given that the most recent talk is that any vote on a 2nd Resolution from the UN explicitly authorizing force is not to be held until 1-2 weeks from now, the big question is, can Blair hold out that long?
More than that... Counting noses on the Security Council, how will it look if a majority of all members, and 4 out of 5 veto-capable Permanent Members, vote down said Resolution?
When one combines this with some of the reports I've seen that our various Embassies have been picking up feelers that sympathy throughout the world is turning against us... That many have come to see Bush as far more dangerous than either Iraq or North Korea... And, for that matter, the vast credibility gap Bush has abroad (such as reported in this article by Paul Krugman in the New York Times, which points out not only Turkey's insistence on cash on the barrelhead because they have no faith in Bush to give them a dime post-war, but also Mexico's -- Mexico's -- almost certain vote against us because Vicente Fox feels betrayed by his former pal Jorge.)...
Well, I know he ran as "a uniter, not a divider," but do we really want the rest of the world to start muttering "America delenda est"?
The Financial Times reports today that yesterday, 122 Labour Members of Parliament voted in support of a resolution declaring that the case for war against Iraq is "unproven".
According to Parliament's own figures, that means Blair's majority has shrunk from 165 to 43 -- a loss of about 3/4.
Given that the most recent talk is that any vote on a 2nd Resolution from the UN explicitly authorizing force is not to be held until 1-2 weeks from now, the big question is, can Blair hold out that long?
More than that... Counting noses on the Security Council, how will it look if a majority of all members, and 4 out of 5 veto-capable Permanent Members, vote down said Resolution?
When one combines this with some of the reports I've seen that our various Embassies have been picking up feelers that sympathy throughout the world is turning against us... That many have come to see Bush as far more dangerous than either Iraq or North Korea... And, for that matter, the vast credibility gap Bush has abroad (such as reported in this article by Paul Krugman in the New York Times, which points out not only Turkey's insistence on cash on the barrelhead because they have no faith in Bush to give them a dime post-war, but also Mexico's -- Mexico's -- almost certain vote against us because Vicente Fox feels betrayed by his former pal Jorge.)...
Well, I know he ran as "a uniter, not a divider," but do we really want the rest of the world to start muttering "America delenda est"?
