Examination of Witness (Questions 160-179)
RT HON
TONY BLAIR
MP
22 NOVEMBER 2005
Q160 Malcolm Bruce: Prime Minister,
my concern is that we are provoking a reaction. We have detained
35,000 people, 21,000 have been released without any charge which
also means something like 10,000 have been detained without any
indication of why they are being detained. What effect does that
have on the communities from which those people have been taken?
Mr Blair: I do not know. It is
very difficult. The alternative is to let the terrorists and insurgents
do what they will. Now we have got to try to make the political
process work, that is the key to this whole business. The whole
issue is for the first time in December you will have a proper
democratic election. There is not a great deal of good news about
at the moment in this situation because it is very difficult because,
as I say to people, what has happened is virtually every bad element
in the Middle East has decided to make Iraq the battleground,
that is the way it is or the way they have chosen it to be. However,
what is obviously happening, and you could see this in the referendum
there was a few weeks ago, is that it seems as if you will get
a bigger turnout in the December elections, including from all
parts of the community. Our job is to ensure that democratic election
takes place because that will be the first time they have directly
elected a government. If you get a situation then where you have
got Kurdish, Shi'ia, non-aligned and Sunni participation in the
election to a considerable degree, and a high turnout, then that
will, of course, make a big difference to the situation.
Q161 Malcolm Bruce: I am not denigrating
the development of democratic institutions but as it happens,
we have increasing insurgency attacks on a daily basis, we have
more and more people being detained. Is not the appearance to
people in Iraq that actually the situation is getting worse, they
are wanting occupying forces out and many of those people are
becoming so disaffected they become potential recruits to terrorism?
Mr Blair: You have got to watch
all of those things very carefully, that is absolutely right.
In the end I come back to one basic point, which is that I do
not think we should say that the only choice the Iraqis have is
between being run by Saddam or run by some religious dictator
when what they want is democracy, and we are there to try and
help them get it and we should try and help them get it. I do
not minimise any of the points you make but that is the basic
heart of this. What is the conclusion we reach from this, that
we back away, get out and leave the country at the mercy of warring
factions? It is a fascinating thing, there was a lot of talk about
polling recently and, of course, many Iraqis will feel very conflicted
about the presence of multi-national forces, they want their own
country run by their own forces. The interesting thing is that
people in Iraq are still basically optimistic about their future
and the numbers of people wanting a return to what they had before
are tiny.
Sir George Young: Let me bring in Mike
Gapes who is the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.
Q162 Mike Gapes: Prime Minister,
two years before 9/11 you made a major speech in Chicago where
you called for the doctrine of the international community and
for an interventionist foreign policy. That speech has been very
widely quoted and praised in the United States, including in a
book called NeoConservatism by Irwin Stelzer. Mr Stelzer
said—and I put this quote to you because I am interested
in your reaction to it—"So close are the views of Tony
Blair and George Bush that we are all neoconservatives now".
Is that true?
Mr Blair: I could put it round
the other way and say the idea that countries are not up to do
what they will with their own citizens is a progressive idea.
As a matter of fact, when I first made the speech on what I called
the doctrine of international community I was quite heavily attacked,
I will not say by whom but by some who are in quite high positions
now in the present administration who believed that nation building
was something that sensible governments did not concern themselves
with. I happen to think it is a very progressive idea to say that
bringing democracy to the world is something which should be an
active part of any foreign policy.
Q163 Mike Gapes: How do you differ
from George Bush on foreign policy?
Mr Blair: There are differences
and there are things that we share in common. One obvious difference
has been over Kyoto, for example. On the other hand, in relation
to the global terrorist threat I believe it is a real threat and
we need to get out and after it. I will leave it to others to
make textual analysis of different things we may say. My basic
view is that there is an international political dimension to
globalisation that the world has not quite woken up to and thought
through which is that in exactly the same way globalisation is
changing in our societies, economically and socially, and making
them far more integrated, breaking down national frontiers and
barriers and so on. In exactly the same way, we live in a world
which is essentially inter-dependent and this is the reason for
the push on Africa and development and global poverty and so on.
If you leave a situation where countries are run by appalling
dictatorships, the people are repressed or the people are living
in abject poverty, we will store up a problem for ourselves in
the Western world, the wealthy world, which it is better to take
avoiding action on now, that is my view. That was why I called
it a doctrine of international community.
Sir George Young: That is a good point
on which to move on to Iran. Andrew Miller.
Q164 Andrew Miller: Relations with
Iran are increasingly strained. They have been linked with lethal
attacks on our forces serving in Iraq. You have, quite rightly,
been very firm about the language they have used about Israel.
Have we still got a working relationship with the Iranians?
Mr Blair: At some levels, I think
is the only way to answer that. In terms of the discussions we
continue to have with other European partners and Iran on their
nuclear obligations, yes, to an extent. Things have definitely
got more difficult since the election of the new president, one
would have to be honest about that.
Q165 Andrew Miller: On the nuclear
side, of course, they are playing one nation off against another
in an attempt to keep things outside of the Security Council.
Is there a real risk that their actions could irreparably damage
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Mr Blair: Yes, I think there is
a real risk. If Iran was to develop nuclear weapons capability
then I think it would pose a very serious threat to world stability
and peace, I do not think there is any doubt about that at all.
That is why the remarks of the President of Iran about Israel
recently do not exactly augur well for the type of policy that
they are pursuing, therefore it is not surprising if people are
very concerned about the possibility they get such capability.
Q166 Andrew Miller: Absolutely, but
just on their own borders the Americans are clearly getting rather
twitchy about Iranian incursions into what are perceived as Iraqi
waters under international law. They are clearly tempting retaliation
from either Iraqi or American forces. Can we be assured that Britain
would not get drawn into such potential conflict?
Mr Blair: I do not think we have
any intention of letting it get to that stage. Look, the position
we have with Iran is this. There are three issues that worry people:
there is their nuclear weapons capability and their refusal to
co-operate properly with the Atomic Energy Authority; there is
their support of terrorism around the Middle East and there is
their meddling in Iraq. On each of those three issues we have
real genuine cause for concern. No-one is talking military action
or any of the rest of it, and Iran is quite a different country
from Iraq in many, many ways. It may well be that the change in
Iran comes from within, ultimately, but it is a concern and a
worry for us because they are a powerful country with a large
part of the world's energy resources at their disposal.
Q167 Andrew Miller: Indeed, and one
of the most important border issues is the protection of the Iraqi
oil supplies into the Persian Gulf within a mile of the Iranian
border. Some of that infrastructure is extremely old. It has survived,
amazingly, some of the conflicts, I have to say, but it is extremely
old and it is in extremely vulnerable positions. What are we doing
to seek to strengthen that supply route?
Mr Blair: We are working on this
with the Iraqi Government to try to make sure we upgrade the infrastructure
and the facilities. The problem you have got is that all of the
infrastructure work you want to do at the moment in Iraqi is hobbled
by the security situation, and we have to change that. You are
right, long-term what is sensible in the Middle East is that you
end up with the spread of democracy, the spread of human rights
and countries co-operating together and becoming stable partners
for the outside world. If you get that, you will change an awful
lot of the security and other problems that we have in the world
today. Maybe I am wrong in this but I think a lot of the problems
we have with extremism really come out of the Middle East.
Sir George Young: On human rights, can
we just have a quick question on Guantanamo Bay. James?
Q168 Mr Arbuthnot: Prime Minister,
the Foreign Office has said that the Geneva Conventions apply
to the detainees in Guantanamo Bay. Is it your view that the Geneva
Conventions are being complied with?
Mr Blair: I have not had an up-to-date
report on what is happening in Guantanamo Bay but we would certainly
expect them to be complied with. I have made it clear that I think
this is an anomaly that has to be dealt with sooner or later.
Q169 Mr Arbuthnot: They need to be
complied with in relation to legal advice being available to detainees?
Mr Blair: I do not know, I am
not familiar with every part of the Conventions myself, but certainly
I think it is sensible that the undertakings that have been given
are adhered to.
Q170 Mr Arbuthnot: In any event it
needs to come to an end?
Mr Blair: I have said this before,
I think it is an anomaly and you cannot maintain it forever. It
is obviously a difficult situation. I think most people recognise
at some point this has got to be brought to an end.
Sir George Young: You said a few moments
ago that the ambition was to roll out democracy and human rights
in the Middle East. Can we just stand back and look at the broader
picture. Mike Gapes.
Q171 Mike Gapes: In the light of
experience, Prime Minister, do you believe that the policy of
democratisation and regime change inevitably leads to instability
and the rise of extremist Islamist groups in the Arab and Muslim
world?
Mr Blair: No. I think democratisation
is the answer to extremism in the end but I think the extremists
will fight very hard to stop us democratising these places because
they know that is the end of their extremism. Their whole pitch
is that the purpose of America is to suppress Islam and to make
satellite states of Muslim countries. If you end up with a democracy
where the government decides its policies and the people vote
on the government, it is a pretty big blow to that propaganda.
Q172 Mike Gapes: Let us take an example.
Let us say there was a regime change in Syria, would that not
lead to instability and a further rise of Islamist groups potentially
linked to what is going on in Iraq or elsewhere? Is there not
a danger you undermine and get rid of an authoritarian regime
but the consequence for a number of years is that you have internal
conflict, potentially civil war and instability through a wider
area?
Mr Blair: That is obviously a
concern, and you are absolutely right that when you change a situation
fundamentally you produce a new situation which potentially can
have instability. The only point I would say to you, and you would
recognise yourself, is that if you look at the behaviour of Syria
over the past few years, not least in the Lebanon, has that really
produced stability and order there? I think there are always difficulties
when you are creating transition but in my view the only way you
are going to get long-term stability, and incidentally I believe
this to be absolutely true of the Israeli/Palestinian situation,
is on the basis of democracy. All this stuff about neo-cons or
not neo-cons, if you look at where American policy in the Middle
East has got to, it has got to the point where they are saying
their ultimate security lies in the spread of democracy in the
Middle East. Now it will happen with some countries, you will
be helping them over a period of time. There are a lot of interesting
things happening in countries like Kuwait and Bahrain and other
countries where they are trying to get greater progress towards
democracy but ultimately, as I say, that is not just quite an
idealistic position, I think in today's world it is quite a practical
situation. You are right, in any individual country as change
happens there can be instability. The question is if you leave
them in a position of dictatorship is that stable, and that is
what I think is difficult.
Q173 Sir George Young: Can we have
a quick look at Israel and Palestine. Presumably you are not likely
to follow the example of Arial Sharon, leave the Labour Party
and set up on your own?
Mr Blair: You are right, George,
I am not likely to.
Q174 Mrs Dunwoody: You do not need
to worry, you have Edward on your side!
Mr Blair: Yes. That is a blessing,
the full force of which I am still considering.
Q175 Sir George Young: Just to return,
is there not a risk of deadlock in the Israel/Palestine situation?
Is there not a need for a mediator/moderator to try and get things
moving from the impasse they appear to have reached?
Mr Blair: Yes. You need continual
engagement with this process and that is why I welcome very much
Secretary of State Rice's decision to go there and help with the
border crossing and so on. Yes, you need continual engagement
and the precise nature of that is another matter. That is why
in the London conference in March of this year we got agreement
that there should be a full-time general there on the ground looking
after security. Jim Wolfensohn's plans for reorganising commerce,
industry and the local economy are extremely important and the
programme of reform within the Palestinian Authority is very important
also. The only way these processes ever work is absolute hands-on
management throughout.
Q176 Sir George Young: Are there
any plans for a UK initiative?
Mr Blair: We work very closely
with the Europeans and the Americans and the quartet in doing
this. The UK took an initiative in March of this year which most
people thought was helpful, and some of the changes which have
occurred since have been very worthwhile. Let us be clear about
this, the lead role is going to be exercised by the quartet and
by the Americans in particular. It is interesting, I gave a press
conference with President Bush in April 2004 when I said that
the disengagement plan of Arial Sharon was an extremely important
moment. I remember getting very heavily criticised for it but
I think that has been an extremely important moment, not least
with the consequences that you described a moment or two ago.
What we have now got in the Middle East—this is how I see
it—is a situation where previously what the Americans and
others thought was you do an agreement first, you get a deal and
then you implement it bit by bit. I think what has happened now
is that people are trying to do it from the bottom up. In other
words, you get disengagement from the Gaza and parts of the West
Bank, then the building of Palestinian capability and then further
steps along the way towards when you can get an overall comprehensive
deal which has to be the two viable states.
Q177 Sir George Young: If one goes
back to the question which we originally put at the beginning
of this session, is the policy right and is the policy working
and you stand back, you have got Syria potentially implicated
in political assassination, you have got a diplomatic melt-down
in Iran, you have got horrendous terrorism in Jordan, you have
got all the problems which we have been talking about in Afghanistan
and Iraq and deadlock in Israel and Palestine. Do you really think
the policy is right and is working?
Mr Blair: I think the only policy
that will work is the policy I have described which is the spread
of democracy. If you roll back time, there was an Iraq run by
Saddam, Syria which, okay, it has been exposed what they are doing
in Lebanon but do not think they were not doing it in Lebanon
a few years back, there was a situation in Israel and Palestine
where there was no progress at all and a situation where the very
concept of democracy in the Middle East was going nowhere. Now,
is this very, very difficult as we make change in the Middle East?
Yes, it is incredibly difficult but I personally think the right
policy is to drive through political change in the Middle East,
I think that is the right policy. It will be very difficult because
a lot of these problems have built up over years and years and
years. You only have to look at the situation of the extremism—perhaps
this is a rather difficult thing to say but I will say it—I
think far too many of the regimes in the Middle East have entered
into a kind of unspoken pact with their people and parts of their
civic society where in return for very low levels of political
and human rights you end up with a religious extremist element
being given its head, and I think that is what we are living with
today.
Sir George Young: One final question
from Mohammad Sarwar.
Q178 Mr Sarwar: Prime Minister, you
are right, the spread of democracy in the long term will bring
stability, peace and prosperity in the Middle East. Can you tell
us, do you believe that the United Kingdom Government, the European
Union, the United Nations Security Council and the USA are doing
enough to deal with the root causes of terrorism which are global
injustice and global poverty?
Mr Blair: Yes. I think the very
things we have been trying to do are the way to deal with this:
the spread of democracy, the attack on global poverty, particularly
in Africa, and the attempt to get a settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian
issue. Now all of these things are difficult but I think there
is an agenda that can unify the world today. It is an agenda that
is about dealing with the injustices, not because the injustices
excuse or justify terrorism but because it stands to reason that
the fewer democratic rights, the more extremism, the more global
poverty, the more you are likely to get the type of alienation
and terrorism that we have. I think we have got quite a coherent
world view and the point is that it is going to be difficult.
This will be a process that stretches over many years. All I can
say is I took the view after September 11 that all the things
I had been thinking about prior to that for me came together.
I thought, "Right, from now on, it is absolutely clear, we
need to change the way that we work in the international community"
and that is what we have been trying to do. It will be very difficult.
I think when people look back—at least I hope this is what
happens—and we have managed to bring democracy to countries
like Afghanistan and Iraq, and democracy is seen as perfectly
compatible, as indeed it is—I know you think this with the
religion of Islam—then as we have seen Turkey come into
the European Union, as we have managed to make the changes which
allow people to have a greater sense of justice, then we will
get the type of mutual respect and tolerance that is not just
the heart of a good society within one country but the heart of
good international relations between countries.
Q179 Chairman: Prime Minister, you
have covered an incredibly wide range again and we appreciate
that. I am sure you feel it is worthwhile in view of the notable
convert you have won during this particular session. I am not
sure how well he will fit in the PLP but it will be fascinating
seeing him walk in through the door.
Mr Blair: I am just wondering
whether there could be anything worse than Edward actually!
Chairman: Can I ask you again, as I did
at the beginning, please go away and look again at whether it
really is important keeping Lord Birt out and losing some of the
goodwill you have in this Committee. We look forward to seeing
you in three months' time. Thank you very much.
| 
