8th October 2009 | Draft
Urgent Need for Blair as President of Europe
Maximizing early collective learning in anticipation of future crises
-- / --
Introduction
Learning from manipulative communication skills
Learning from leadership with a problematic track record
Learning from "creative democracy"
Learning from inspirational decision-making
Learning from the "creative accounting" processes of government
Learning from the creative reframing of commitments by government
Learning from the outcome of necessary tough decisions of governance
Questions for urgent collective learning by Europeans
Necessity for a European Lord of Misrule?
References
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it (George Santayana)
Introduction
The unusual procedure of requiring that the Irish engage in a second democratic vote on the EU Lisbon Reform Treaty sets an unusual precedent with regard to democratic voting more generally -- particularly in the very period when it is being decided whether Afghanistan should vote a second time. The Irish referendum is also striking in that Ireland is one of the few EU countries to allow its population the right to a democratic vote on the Lisbon Reform Treaty -- despite promises made by various governments, including that of the UK. What was the nature of the "assurances" provided to Catholic Ireland, to whom were they provided, by whom, and in exchange for what? A remarkable possibility would be the election of Mary Robinson to the position of President of Europe -- being eligible as the former President of Ireland (1990-1997).
Following the Irish vote on 2nd October 2009, ensuring ratification of the treaty, much is now made of the probability that Tony Blair, former prime minister of the UK, will become the first "President of Europe" -- President of the European Council. His interest in the position has been recognized as one of the worst-kept secrets. The inevitability has been noted by one of Rupert Murdoch's prime popular media outlets in the UK, prior to the outcome of the Irish election (Graeme Wilson, President Blair 'within weeks', The Sun, 1st October 2009). The probability was also voiced in Murdoch's upmarket outlet following the election (Tony Blair Likely to Be EU President, Despite European 'Reluctance', The Sunday Times, 4th October 2009).
The question is whether Blair's support for the American-led invasion of Iraq has been forgiven by his many European critics (Stephen Castle (Blair faces a battle for the EU presidency, The New York Times, 16 July 2009; Unwelcome, President Blair, The Economist, 30 July 2009; Tories warn of British backlash to Blair 'presidency', TimeOnline, 3 October 2009; Simon Taylor, Opposition mounts against Blair for Council president, European Voice, 8 October 2009; Esther Addley, Blair faces critics from pulpit and public as Britain remembers Iraq, The Guardian, 10 October 2009). He is remembered for having shunned the single currency. He is the only prospective candidate with a website protesting his candidature. However Blair would only require a qualified majority among the 27 European heads of state and government -- who meet for the purpose of that election at a summit at the end of October 2009.
Would it be possible to appoint any European more implicated in both the development of the financial bubble and in the most costly and destructive military operations since World War II -- as well as being part of the culture of abuse associated with the expense scandal of British MPs? All of these have resulted in an unprecedented call on remedial support from taxpayers -- possibly for generations to come. Given the momentum towards the inevitability of his appointment, what are the unlearnt lessons with which Europeans could be fruitfully confronted by that appointment?
Prior to the re-election of José Manuel Barroso as President of the European Commission on 16 September 2009, a report in the Financial Times described the possible Blair-Barroso team in highly controversial terms (Wolfgang Münchau, Blair and Barroso: Europe's team from hell, FT.com, 19 July 2009). In summary Münchau concludes: To say this combination of leaders does not reflect the diversity of European opinion would be an understatement.
Contrary to such assessments however, the following arguments highlight the vital necessity of the appointment of Blair to that role as a means of engendering rapid collective learning by the peoples of Europe regarding the credibility and practice of democratic governmental leadership in the 21st century -- at least in a Europe already remarkable for its democratic deficit (Democratic deficit in the European Union, Wikipedia).
For a related development of this theme see: George Monbiot, Making this ruthless liar EU president is a crazy plan. But I'll be backing Blair. The Guardian, 26 October 2009 [with over 570 comments by readers]
|
Learning from manipulative communication skills
- Communication skills: Blair's renown and visibility as
a communicator lead readily to the assumption that he would make an ideal
president. He is a prime choice for those who want 'Mr Europe' to
have a global recognition factor and a touch of the kind of leadership charisma
that is not traditionally associated with the EU (Bruno Waterfield, If
Tony Blair is made President of Europe, the EU will never be the same again, The
Telegraph, 2
October 2009).
- Blair exemplifies the motivational skills long described and extolled by Dale Carnegie (How to Win Friends and Influence People, 1936). These may be usefully recognized as being justified under the legal concept of puffery with which Blair is necessarily familiar given his training.
- Europe could indeed benefit from a leader with glitzy communication skills and with proven capacity to make every use of "spin" -- crudely, in political terms, a "bullshit artist". The collective challenge for Europeans is to understand how to see through such artistry rather than being conned by it -- as demonstrated in the past.
The necessary collective learning is between the image and demonstrated reality. Europeans need to distinguish between the unquestionable merits of such qualities and what it is easily forgotten they have been used to hide.
- News management: There is indeed merit in benefitting
from Blair's acknowledged expertise in making use of "spin" in
every aspect of his leadership, especially in dealing with the media through
news management (as skillfully assisted by Alistair
Campbell).
- Creative statistical interpretation: A notable feature of "spin" is the creative selection and "interpretation" of official statistics to reframe issues so as to justify the necessity or success of policies. This approach might be expected to fit well with the statistical office of the EU (Eurostat) which has already demonstrated its amenability to irregularities (Eurostat Scandal; Q and A: Eurostat scandal, BBC News. 27th September 2003). Such skills are presumably vital to the development of a coherent European democracy based on spin -- reframing anything that might be otherwise considered as a democratic deficit.
Learning from leadership with a problematic track record
- Problematic background: What is the merit of electing
someone against whom there is alleged to be evidence that they are other
than honest -- as all politicians must necessarily claim to be? There is
a case for stopping the pretence of electing worthy individuals -- supposedly
exemplars of democratic values -- namely reframing the "democracy of
pretence". There is
clearly a case for voters to shift from the naive assumption that potential
leaders are fundamentally untainted to one in which anyone able to take up
such a position should also be assessed in terms of their dubious actions
in the past. As an extreme example, the lack of transparency with regard
to the Nazi past of such as Kurt
Waldheim,
UN Secretary-General (1972-1981), provides a prime example of what has been
unsatisfactory -- especially given his vociferous defence of
human rights in that role. It has also been
argued that secret flaws are a primary requisite for election to high office
-- as a means whereby unknown parties can constrain the office-holder
to pursuit of a preferred
agenda when necessary
- Malfeasance: Blair's appointment offers a means
of highlighting for future voters the extent to which their European representatives
and national leaders -- notably those eligible for the position of President
of the European Council -- are the focus of indictments regarding some form
of malfeasance
in office. Wikipedia provides checklists for political scandals
in the following European countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and
the UK. Curiously
in the UK, a Freedom of Information request to
ascertain how many
sitting MP's have some form of criminal record resulted in the indication that
no such information was held by the Office of the Leader of the House of Commons
(Christopher Stacey, Members
of Parliament and Criminal Convictions, 2009). Such information is also
not readily available for other European countries, if at all. Staff of the European
Commission, if convicted of a criminal offence, are entitled to take personal
leave for any period of incarceration.
- Containing embarrassment: It is vital for Blair himself,
the reputation of the British government (if only in the eyes of its
citizens), and of his Labour Party (facing a major electoral challenge),
that Blair should be rapidly appointed President of Europe in order to
constrain the capacity of the UK Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry
into Iraq (chaired by Sir John Chilcot) to call him as a witness in 2010
or in any way call into question his actions (Matthew d'Ancona, Can
the Iraq inquiry finally nail Blair? The Telegraph,
1st August 2009; Britain's
inquiry into Iraq war to be private, upsetting critics, CBC
News, 15 June 2009; Iraq
inquiry: Chilcot urged not to let Blair and Brown 'off the hook', The
Guardian, 30 July 2009; Statement
by Sir John Chilcot, chairman of the Iraq Inquiry, WhitehallPages.net,
30 July 2009).
Any diplomatic immunity, to be enjoyed by Blair in holding the new function, would also provide valuable "damage limitation" in ensuring cover-up of any issues that might embarrass other members of the Coalition of the Willing, most notably the USA as principal ally of Europe.
Learning from "creative democracy"
- Reframing democratic processes: The election of Blair
as first official permanent president of Europe would have the great merit
of demonstrating publicly the extent to which the European project is eschewing
democratic processes. Consistent with the refusal to hold democratic referenda,
this is epitomized by an election behind closed doors by the 27
European heads of state and government, and without any of the candidates
having campaigned before the court of public opinion. More striking, given
the unseemly haste with which the appointment is being prepared, alternative
candidates will only be presented as tokens, if at all.
- Undemocratic government decision-making: Blair has demonstrated
capacity as prime minister to engage in questionable cabinet-style decision-making
-- a so-called "Blair Presidency" -- charged to have been bypassing
normal parliamentary processes, as described by R. A. W. Rhodes
(Blair
and Governance, 2007; The
Court Politics of the Blair Presidency, 2005). There is every possibility
that he will endeavour to replicate the process in his new role. As noted
by William
Hague, UK shadow foreign secretary: Any holder is likely to try to
centralise power for themselves in Brussels and dominate national foreign
policies. In the hands of an operator as ambitious as Tony Blair that is
a near certainty. (The Guardian, 16 July 2009).
His intentions are perhaps implicit in his establishment in 2008 of a Tony
Blair Governance Initiative.
- "Shoe-ins" vs "Shoe-throwers": If Blair is indeed to be a "shoe-in" to the role of president by current European democratic processes, Europeans will feel increasingly empowered to follow the widely publicized precedent of "shoe-throwers". These might be considered the ultimate form of symbolic peaceful democratic protest. Arguably to date it has only been those exposed to the "spread of democracy" that have engendered such capacity -- as in the shoe-throwing rejection of George Bush (Blair's former colleague) and the reaction against the IMF (Bush shoe-ing worst Arab insult, BBC News, 15 December 2008; Sebnem Arsu, Another Shoe Flies, This Time in Istanbul at I.M.F. Chief, The New York Times, 1 October 2009). Europeans may finally learn from the "democratic shoe-in" of Blair of the need for their own form of "shoe-throwing".
There is no open contest for the job; no official contenders; no public campaign. The powers are undefined, the job description is sketchy. Issues of budgets, staffing, offices and division of powers among other top EU posts have not been resolved. And there is no national or European conversation between leaders and voters over who should be president. Europe's leaders ritually declare that the Lisbon treaty will make the EU more democratic, more open, and more aacountable, but the clandestine manoeuvering over the job makes a papal conclave look like an exercise in transparency. (Ian Traynor, The Guardian, 23 October 2009) |
Learning from inspirational decision-making
- Insights from Christian Democracy: There is an extensive
literature on the merit of embedding Christian values in the Lisbon Treaty
and this was a matter of major concern to Ireland in voting on that treaty
(Dawid
Bunikowski, Axiology and the Treaty on a Constitution for Europe,
2007; David Pollock, Europe -
Christian or Secular? International Humanist and Ethical Union,
29 November, 2006). Blair's publicized conversion to Catholicism (Tony
Blair joins Catholic Church, BBC News, 22 December 2007), together with his explicit
promotion of faith-based governance, might legitimately raise concerns given
the major scandals that have been notably associated with the political parties
founded on the principles of Christian
Democracy. A prime example is the German
CDU illegal contributions scandal while under the control of Chancellor Helmut
Kohl in the 1990s. The Christian
Democrats in Italy, and their leadership, have also been variously implicated
in financial scandals.
- Faith-based decision-making: The Blair candidature is
extremely helpful in highlighting the challenge of faith-based decision-making
-- ignoring democratic processes. As so convincingly demonstrated by George
Bush, claims of divine inspiration are given greater weight than the
views of voters -- even when they constitute a majority (presumably bereft
on such inspiration).The Blair candidacy would make this even more apparent
given his recent conversion and his establishment of the Tony
Blair Faith Foundation in 2008. It is vital for European voters to be
exposed to an "I Believe" (a Credo)
that takes precedence over democratically formulated views -- as was the
case with the intervention in Iraq. Many may thereby feel empowered to be
similarly inspired -- as demonstrated by those engaged in jihad.
- Questionable allegiance: There is learning in the election
of someone with recognized unconditional primary allegiance to what would
otherwise be framed in secular societies as a "guru", with
all the undeclared obligations that this may imply. This might be considered
a refreshing contrast to election of individuals who may have undeclared
allegiance to the hierarchy of a secret society. In the case of Blair this
could be seen as an assertion of Christian
exclusivism, valued by many voters as a means of prioritizing Christian
values in European institutions otherwise assumed to be tolerant of a
full spectrum of beliefs.
More challenging might be any assumption, by him or by others, that he is a "defender of the faith", as implied by his Credo. This could impact on the controversies associated with:
- pro-life issues (but naturally excluding issues relating to slaughter in "just wars" and the massive sale of arms to that end, notably promoted by the UK during Blair's premiership, despite the commitments of his Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook in seeking to add "an ethical dimension" to UK foreign policy).
- inhibiting European initiatives in relation to overpopulation by diverting attention and resources to other issues claimed to be of higher priority
Especially problematic might be assumptions arising from Christian exceptionalism as so dramatically challenged by the behaviour of a significant percentage of the primary representatives of those values (Catholic sex abuse cases, Wikipedia).
- Conscience laundering: Blair has admitted to no mistakes
associated with his leadership and has expressed no regret. It might then
be appropriate to ask whether the confessions of sins associated with his
subsequent conversion and absolution implies that his conscience is now clear
of all guilt -- laundered of any complicity in the deaths of 1,000,000 Iraqis.
Do those incarcerated for murder benefit from such ability -- presumably
justifying their immediate release?
- Conflicts of interest: Blair's premiership has proven
to have been witness to interrelated scandals among British MPs -- variously
termed a "culture
of abuse" or a "culture of excess" (Owen Bowcott, Expense
culture brings risk of corruption, say activists, The
Guardian, 10 May 2009; More
evidence of MPs 'claim culture' disclosed,
The Independent, 10 May 2009). These included the "cash
for honours"
and the parliamentary
expenses scandals -- now purportedly resulting in much tighter regulation.
They had been preceded by a "cash
for questions" scandal, prior to Blair's
premiership.
Aside from any complicity in such processes by Blair, Europeans urgently need to understand from his appointment how such processes -- essentially focussed on financial benefit -- might translate into analogous processes in a faith-based context. Perhaps a form of non-financial "sale of indulgences"? Should official appointees also be required to include on any (parliamentary) "register of interests" those of a non-pecuniary nature?
Learning from the "creative accounting" processes of government
- Realism: Given the realism with which Blair handled any evidence of alleged
financial "inducements" by British corporations to foreign clients (contrary
to OECD formal recommendations), he is clearly appropriately schooled for
the EU environment in which there have been many examples of such realism
(if only the dramatic case of Edith
Cresson, a former French Prime
Minister and European Commissioner, who was the main target of accusations
that resulted in resignation of the European Commission in 1999). The
significance of such incidents is compounded by the fact that for many
years the European Union's auditors have refused to endorse the spending
of large parts of the EU budget -- funded by citizen taxpayers (Stephen
Mulvey, Why
the EU's audit is bad news, BBC, 24 October 2006)
- Uncritical complicity with business: Blair has demonstrated
a degreem of uncritical complicity with a business and financial
mindset, widely extolling the promise of its achievements in his official
capacity as prime minister -- perhaps even to be described as bubble-blower extraordinaire --
ignoring fundamental flaws in the financial system (Ruth Sunderland, Dante's
Inferno is no more of a fantasy than the fairytales the bankers told us, The
Observer, 4 October 2009). These subsequently resulted in the global
collapse of that system in 2008 and the disastrous impact on the livelihoods
of millions worldwide.
With his Thatcher-inherited neoliberal policies, Blair clearly demonstrated the skills to assist in sustaining the false narrative about the social value of finance in the UK, as documented by the Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (An alternative report on UK banking reform, 2009). The European peoples could presumably benefit from further early exposure to "false narrative" -- to ensure subsequent emergence of a style of governance appropriate to the graver challenges of the future.
- Expenses and perks: Given Blair's tolerance during his
extended premiership (1997-2007) of the expenses regime of
British MPs (only subsequently made evident as a major
scandal in 2009), this tolerance will be much appreciated within
an EU institutional setting, especially by MEPs who benefit non-transparently
from a similar range of unchallenged perks.
European taxpayers can benefit from further insights into such a pattern which a Blair appointment may be able to provide. He himself has been noteworthy for making expenses claims of which taxpayers would otherwise not have been informed (£7,000 for roof repairs, two days before he left office, etc), especially since relevant documents were shredded by officials of the House of Commons "by mistake", despite being the subject of a legal challenge (Marina Hyde, Bend it like Blair: how lucky Tony still lives the dream, The Guardian, 3 October 2009).
Learning from the creative reframing of commitments by government
- Breach of promise: Blair has exemplified the necessary
capacity of modern leadership to reframe promises and pledges when it subsequently
proves necessary to renege on such commitments -- if they were made with
any sincerity in the first place. Ironically, Blair once promised Britons
a referendum on the original Treaty that created the post of EU president.
The hot air through which promises are articulated is a valuable metaphor
for the challenge of climate change in constraining other emissions -- in
this case to achieve sustainable socio-political change.
However the experience of Blair's occupancy of the office could lead Europeans to demand of future politicians that the hot air of their promises be subject to legally binding constraints matching those considered essential for carbon emissions.
- Commitments by the G7, the G8 and the G20: Blair was necessarily
a party to the commitments of the annual meetings of the most powerful world
economies during his premiership. He was notably host to the G8
Gleneagles Summit in 2005 with its commitments to aid
to Africa and debt cancellation. On subsequent
analysis it has been noted
that:
- closer investigation of many of the promises made at Gleneagles revealed that some of the aid funds were rehashed versions of aid already pledged and the aid was often used to privatise public services to businesses based in the donor country.
- even three years on many G8 countries were backsliding on their aid quantity commitments, as with their commitments against trade protectionism.
- the debt deal was not 'full' cancellation of debts at all but only cancellation of the debts for 40 potential countries, and even then only after completing the 'Heavily Indebted Poor Country' (HIPC) initiative -- meaning more of the same economic conditionalities as highlighted as problems by the Make Poverty History campaign
- although the 2005 G8 communique promised that developing countries should be able to decide their own economic policies, there has been little evidence of this in practice.
Learning from the outcome of necessary tough decisions of governance
- Circumvention of international law: What is to be learned
from Blair's femonstrated capacity to handle and interpret creatively any
inadequate civil service and intelligence reports on sensitive information,
which might otherwise reduce the justification for strategic commitments?
Blair has shown his leadership ability in engaging in an extended illegal
war with Iraq -- circumventing international law and the United Nations Security
Council (of which the UK is a permanent member). There is now considerable
evidence of his creative capacity in misleading the UK parliament and its
peoples about that decision.
- Collusion in torture: There is increasing concern about
alleged British collusion in torture during Blair's premiership -- despite
Blair's formal denial of its use. One report by Ian Cobain (The
Truth about Torture: Britain's catalogue of shame, The Guardian,
8th July 2009) notes:
Today, however, there is mounting evidence that torture is still regarded by some agents of the British state as a useful and legitimate investigative tool. There is evidence too that in the post-9/11 world, government officials have been prepared to look the other way while British citizens, and others, have been tortured in secret prisons around the world. It is also clear that an official policy, devised to govern British intelligence officers while interrogating people held overseas, resulted in people being tortured. The Guardian has established that Tony Blair, when prime minister, was aware of the existence of this policy. What he knew of its terrible consequences is less clear: he has repeatedly been asked, in a series of letters from The Guardian, what he believed to have happened to those who were subjected to the policy, but he has repeatedly failed to answer the question. There is a growing suspicion that Blair could not have been alone, and that other very senior figures in government may have been aware of the existence of Britain's secret interrogation policy.
Relevant to the argument here is the demand by UK Liberal Democrats at their annual conference that Tony Blair should not be allowed to become EU President while it is "unclear" what his role was over allegations of British complicity in the torture of terror suspects (Ben Padley, Blair 'torture policy' inquiry demanded, The Independent, 21 September 2009). Blair's spokesman responded that his government had never "authorised, condoned or colluded in torture" (Blair torture claim 'total lie', BBC News, 22 September 2009). This would be consistent with the point made by Ian Cobain (Torture policy: look but don't touch, The Sydney Morning Herald, 19 June 2009) -- perhaps to be equated with Bill Clinton's famous defence: I tried marijuana once. I did not inhale?
- Ethically unconstrained decision-making capacity: Blair
has demonstrated capacity to ensure, with impunity and without regret, the
collective commitment to tough decisions, notably various wars and invasions,
irrespective of the accumulating number of deaths -- currently estimated
at over 1,000,000 in the case Iraq (one of the greatest, and most expensive,
military disasters in the history of the world).
Acceptance of such numbers had effectively been framed by a US Ambassador to the United Nations, Madeleine Albright, the first woman to become US Secretary of State. When asked by an interviewer with regards to the effect of sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima...is the price worth it?". Albright replied: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it." (We Think the Price is Worth It, Fair, 2001). The UK, with Blair as Prime Minister, was the closest ally of the USA with respect to Iraq. The "we" presumably includes Blair -- as would be the case with respect to the US "enhanced interrogation" policy..
Further such tough decisions will presumably have to be made in responding to the problems of the future -- as framed through present modes of governance. Europeans can benefit considerably from being reminded how such decisions will be taken within the current pattern of governance and the numbers likely to suffer in consequence.
- Constrained efficacy in complex situations: Demonstration
of the limited effectiveness of a person with Blair's much admired skills
in dealing with the complexities of the Middle East where he has been the
Special Envoy of the Quartet
on the Middle East -- since resigning as prime minister in 2007. Europeans
can usefully recognize that the most notable outcome of his intervention
was the receipt of an award (Aislinn Simpson, Former
Prime Minister Tony Blair wins million dollar Israeli leadership prize, The
Telegraph, 17th February
2009).
The nature of any quid pro quo remains unclear.
Wolfgang Münchau (Blair and Barroso: Europe's team from hell, FT.com, 19 July 2009) stresses that: Mr Blair is not a politician who relishes the nitty gritty of technical disputes in areas such as fishery quotas. Nor is he a man who could be relied upon to provide leadership during a European crisis... the EU's leadership problem is not primarily one of communication or perception. It is for real.
Questions for urgent collective learning by Europeans
Given the momentum towards the inevitability of Blair's appointment, what are the unlearnt lessons with which Europeans could be fruitfully (and urgently) confronted by that appointment?
Democratic dictatorship: Given Blair's widespread unpopularity as a result of his leadership on Iraq, and his support of the Bush regime, what measure of democratic deficit in Europe is to be construed as indicating emergence of some form of "democratic dictatorship" -- through which higher degrees of dictatorship are enabled, despite use of spin to claim the contrary? Already in September 2009, unelected ambassadors to the EU began holding an extra meeting every week to thrash out the rules and procedures of the new post-Lisbon EU.
Reframing traditional monarchy: For the many opposed to the legacy of traditional monarchical systems, considered by them to be outdated in the 21st century, the President of Europe will presumably take precedence over any head of state -- namely ensuring that those such as Queen Elisabeth II are put in their place in matters of protocol. Why have those citizens appreciative of their monarchies been neither informed nor consulted on this matter?
Institutional cynicism: As noted above, would it be possible to appoint any European more implicated in both the development of the financial bubble and in the most costly and destructive military operations since World War II? Since his resignation as premier Blair has also epitomized the income inequality which has been the focus of such widespread concern in the economic aftermath of the collapse of the financial bubble. In the midst of that collapse Blair was reported to have earned £12m since resigning (Deborah Summers, Tony Blair is 'highest paid' public speaker in world, The Guardian, 29 October 2008).
Is there any evidence that the strategic consequences of his appointment would be other than "more of the same"?
Evolution of "democracy"? Is visibility and name recognition increasingly considered to be replacing the need for any European democratic electoral process?
Collective learning: If policies promoted internationally increasingly take the form of what might be termed "snake oil" remedies:
- How many encounters with a "snake-oil salesman" are required by a society before the lessons of necessary vigilance are internalized -- into long-term collective memory?
- How does a society learn to "see through" the persuasive skills of the "silver tongued" (The tongue of the righteous is choice silver, but the heart of the wicked is little worth, Proverbs 10:20)
- Whether in the form of doublespeak, or the "forked tongue" of concern to the religious, how its discernment distinguished from facile demonization?
Eliciting vigilance: How does the exercise elicit vigilance in preparation for any future wanabee European dictator -- especially if he or she is able to offer even more glowing promises, untainted by widespread popular knowledge of Blair's documented track record?
Democratic deficit: As the candidate allegedly aspiring to replace David Cameron as the probable future UK prime minister, Boris Johnson (currently mayor of London) considers a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to be vital: If Tony Blair is going to be president of Europe I want a referendum on the matter and a lot of people will agree with me.... The British people are entitled to one. (Nicholas Watt, Cameron and Mayor deny rift over Lisbon referendum.The Guardian, 5 October 2009)
What legitimacy has the "voice of Europe", as articulated by its President, when the 27 governments do not dare to allows their electorates to elect such a president by popular vote -- and have reneged on commitments to do so? Is it appropriate that Blair should assume the public office of President of the European Council, given that he had promised Britons a referendum on the original Treaty that created the post of EU president?
Future governance: Is the behind-closed-doors procedure, the only way that Blair could achieve the position of President of Europe? In the absence of democratic safeguards, what precedent does this set for the appointment of even less satisfactory candidates to that position -- to face the critical challenges of governance in the turbulent future of the 21st century?
Future "dodgy dossiers": Aside from his much-challenged complicity in allegedly "egging up" the "dodgy dossier" in support of intervention in Iraq, on what other critical issues might analogous processes be adopted in the larger framework of Europe? (Blair's 'dodgy dossier' on Iraq set to be revealed after Government loses appeal on keeping it secret, MailOnline, 24 January 2008; Scott MacMillan, Blair's "Dodgy Dossier", Slate, 25 June 2003). Can Europe afford another "dodgy dossier"? But the great advantage of a Blair appointment is that it may well offer Europeans a new opportunity to learn how better to constrain such tendencies by their leadership.
Historical comparisons? From a historical perspective, are there useful comparisons to be made between the first President of the USA and the first President of Europe and the challenges they faced?
A comparable appointment?: How might the election of Blair as President of Europe be fruitfully compared with the election of someone of the moral and ethical probity of his colleague George Bush as President of the Organization of American States (OAS) -- with the challenge of finding people to fulfil the roles of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld? It is very probable that such an appointment would elicit a high degree of democratic integration across the Americas.
Blair's "cherry tree": Is it to
be expected that, like George
Washington, Tony Blair will be enwrapped (by spin) in questionable myth
and urban legend -- given the religiosity of both and their purported claims
with regard to lying? Not to be forgotten in this respect is the famous tale
regarding Washington having chopped down his father's cherry tree. When
asked about it, he is alleged to have responded with the famous line "I
cannot tell a lie, I did it with my little hatchet."
The tale long
recounted to children, but for which there is no evidence, was part of a myth-making
exercise by Mason Weems that
made Washington a legendary figure beyond his wartime and presidential achievements.
Will the Commission of Inquiry into Iraq be the occasion for creative myth-making
regarding Blair's own "cherry tree" -- perhaps to be framed by Alistair Campell?
Necessity for a European Lord of Misrule?
The learning experiences for Europeans, so fortuitously offered by the Blair appointment, are clearly superior to those which might be offered by someone likely to be described as a "nonentity". Europeans need President Blair urgently.
It is because of the highly challenging nature of the points raised above that Tony Blair would be an ideal President of Europe. Given the trend in European democracy and the framing of the agenda to "spread democracy" across the cultures of the world as an unmitigated good, Blair could provide an ideal catalyst for the emergence of a vital new pattern.
Healthy tradition: There is a valued tradition in many cultures across the world of a Lord of Misrule (Prince des Sots in French; Precentor Stultorum in Latin). In Europe it can be traced back to pagan times. It was a feature of the ancient Roman festival of Saturnalia, and of the Holy Roman Empire. Notably celebrated on carnival occasions, the incarnation of such a role triggers valuable psycho-social learning processes -- correctives to an accumulation of social ills. Such a possibility is given credibility by the fact that one of Blair's closest subordinates during his premiership was widely known as the Prince of Darkness, subsequently appointed as EU Trade Commissioner and ennobled as Lord Mandelson (Andrew Grice, Peter Mandelson: 'Prince of Darkness', The Independent, 21 April 2003; 'Prince of darkness' returns, BBC News, 12 October 1999). Appropriately one reviewer of the TV comedy Lord of Misrule (1996) says of the actor playing a smooth-talking Tory Prime Minister that he "eerily resembles Tony Blair". With regard to the Montol festivities in Penzance, "mock" officials are traditionally appointed, such as the Mock Mayor -- who in 2008 was Tony 'Mock' Blair (Alex Langstone, Montol and the Lord of Misrule, Spirit of Albion, 26 December 2008).
The appointment of Blair offers such a corrective possibility, exemplifying as he does so many problematic aspects of governance. It is with these that Europeans can most beneficially engage collectively. Following the analysis of John Ralston Saul (The Unconscious Civilization, 1995), the misrule of which Blair is a proven exponent, thus provides a means of engendering a collective European consciousness of higher degree. In the terms of Jungian psychology, it offers the opportunity of consciously integrating the collective shadow of Europe -- giving healthy institutional expression to that shadow, otherwise suppressed (Megge Hill Fitz-Randolph, The Collective Shadow in Jungian Psychology, 2008; Paul Levy, Shadow Projection: the fuel of war, 2009; Attacking the Shadow through Iraq, 2002). This may indeed be the fundamental challenge of "European integration" -- a process of European conscientization and critical consciousness.
The potential was well-demonstrated by the Europe-wide mass anti-war protests (15 February 2003) -- often with carnival-like elements -- triggered by the policies Blair was instrumental in engendering in relation to the intervention in Iraq. His appointment would elicit a level of discernment currently inhibited by the distraction of his unquestionable communication skills -- best understood as miscommunication (in the light of 1,000,000 Iraqi deaths).
Civil defence: Blair's appointment is then best to be seen as a pre-emptive appointment to elicit the collective skills necessary as protective "cognitive anti-bodies" to respond to the emergence of manipulative leaders in the future -- compared to whom Blair may be but an apprentice. In this sense his appointment can be usefully understood as a precautionary act of civil defence -- a vital training exercise in collective vigilance with respect to future socio-political emergencies. As with the metaphorical cure of the "hair of the dog", a Blair appointment might then be understood as a form of homeopathic remedy for Europe's strategic ills (Remedies to Global Crisis: "Allopathic" or "Homeopathic"? Metaphorical complementarity of "conventional" and "alternative" models, 2009).
If increasing proportions of European populations believe that their governments are lying, then there is a case for deliberately institutionalizing lying at the European level so that a healthy, collective, corrective response can be elicited.
However, given the frequency with which opposing political parties in parliamentary democracies already formally accuse each other of "lying", to what extent should parliament be "re-cognized" as an institutional framework for dealing with lying -- by the "other"? (Us and Them: Relating to Challenging Others, 2009). Is the voice of the majority necessarily the "voice of truth" in such a context?
Is such an institution adequate to discernment of any future "Big Lie", so notoriously recognized in the past in the following terms: The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders...tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.
Relevance of early European history: In considering "European integration" in terms of "conscientization", it is instructive to recall what might be considered the "G8" or the "G20" of the time -- and its "Lisbon Reform Treaty" -- in a period when economic challenges were considered secondary. The relevant example is known as the Council of Basel (or the Council of Florence), namely an Ecumenical Council of bishops and other ecclesiastics of the Roman Catholic Church, meeting from 1431 to 1439. The parties seeking integrative reform sought to meet outside the field of influence of the Papacy and the Holy Roman Empire. Its organization was disrupted by the threat of plague -- reminiscent of the current threat of a flu pandemic in Europe.
The Council adopted an anti-papal attitude, proclaimed the superiority of the Council over the Pope and prescribed an oath to be taken by every Pope on his election -- issues analogous to those currently faced in the appointment of Blair by the European Council? The Council successfully negotiated reunification with several Eastern Churches (most notably the Eastern Orthodox Church) -- reaching agreements on such matters as papal primacy, purgatory, and the Nicene Creed.
With the fall of Constantinople in 1453, a subsequent Council declared the Basel group heretics and excommunicated them, affirming the superiority of the Pope over such Councils -- effectively institutionalizing the religious fragmentation evident today. Parallels might be fruitfully drawn with current attempts to integrate the "Eastern economies" and the challenging role of "Brussels" (as the present-day Rome) -- with the continuing underlying influence of the "Rome" of history through current arguments for "Christian values". The parallel is even evident to a degree in the schismatic alternation of the papacy between Rome and Avignon in that period (currently reprised by that between Brussels and Strasbourg). Worse however, in the light of its complicity in the financial bubble, is the manner in which institutional Europe has effectively "excommunicated" the "alternatives" represented by the constituency of the World Social Forum with no exploration of how their perspectives might be integrated (All Blacks of Davos vs All Greens of Porto Alegre: reframing global strategic discord through polyphony? 2007).
Relevant to the argument here is that one of the few measures to survive, agreed by the Council of Basel, was the outlawing, under the very severest penalties, of the traditional Feast of Fools at which the Lord of Misrule was traditionally appointed. Known also as the festum fatuorum, festum stultorum, festum hypodiaconorum, or fête des fous, such popular medieval festivals were notably celebrated by the clergy and laity from the fifth century until the sixteenth century in European countries -- as a Christian reprise of the Roman Saturnalia. In the medieval version the young people, who played the chief parts, chose from among their own number a mock pope, archbishop, bishop, or abbot to reign as Lord of Misrule. The primary function seems always to have been a brief social revolution, in which power, dignity and impunity are briefly conferred on those in a subordinate position.
The question to be asked is whether prohibition of such popular celebration has not been fundamentally damaging to processes of "European integration" and healthy conscientization -- damage only too evident in European voter apathy, the democratic deficit and the alienation of the young. The most evident symbol of this has been the unprecedented European popular vote for the demonic Lordi, a heavy metal/hard rock band, on the occasion of the 2006 Eurovision Song Contest. But the style of the Feast of Fools is only too evident in the popular protests by which European institutional summits are now typically accompanied and mocked. Echoes of this process are to be found in the UK where the Official Monster Raving Loony Party was registered as a political party in 1983 -- long led by Screaming Lord Sutch. Equivalents have been created in other European countries, as discussed elsewhere (Liberating Provocations: use of negative and paradoxical strategies, 2005). Appointment of Blair, under the pressure of key European government leaders, could however be construed as a celebration of their complicity in the foolishness of the democratically unpopular intervention in Iraq through the undemocratic Coalition of the Willing.
Far more controversial is the challenge of healthy integration of sexuality into processes of conscientization. Its problematic manifestation on the occasion of the Feast of Fools was used as primary justification for the prohibition of that celebration in the light of "Christian values", as helpfully discussed by Gordon Rattray Taylor (Sex In History, 1954), especially in relation to the Feast of Fools (The Minor Themes). Sexuality has effectively been driven out of any consideration of the challenge of European integration (or the overpopulation problems faced by a resource-challenged globe) although only too evident as the cognitive context in which it must necessarily take place. European institutions are essentially "cognitively asexual" (if not "infertile"), irrespective of what goes on behind closed doors (Women and the Underside of Meetings: symptoms of denial in considering strategic options, 2009). In that respect also the European Commission echoes the long-standing policies of the Roman Catholic Church -- most evidently called into question by the current abuses of its own clergy in practices consistent with those it condemns in the Feast of Fools.
As with the Catholic Church, the European project is already embodying the most pathological aspects of that which it rejects -- as characteristic of the process of enantiodromia. Strategically it is itself in danger of becoming a kind of Feast of Fools -- perhaps well-recognized through frequent allusions to "gravy train", "trough" and "feeding frenzy" (Fran Abrams, Politics: Lord Neill Inquiry: British MEP `gravy train' may dry up, The Independent, 28 October 1998; Nicola Smit, Select aboard! Eurocrats get gravy train, TimesOnline, 1 June 2008). The deliberate appointment of Blair -- a Lord of Misrule -- would constitute a corrective to that tendency. Ironically there is place for a satirist such as the 12th century monk Nigel Wireker (Speculum stultorum -- A Mirror of Fools) to reframe popular understanding of the European project.
"Re-cognizing" criminality: Given the increasing recognition of the percentage of those involved in national and international governance -- often at the highest level -- who have some form of criminal record (or are the subject of judicial inquiry), there is even a case for exploring a more radical proposal. It is widely understood that such a record does not imply that the person is not potentially of great value, often precisely because of the mindset that resulted in illegal activity. Following the forthcoming UK Commission of Inquiry on Iraq, Blair himself might be subject to indictment for war crimes -- as with many valuable people before him, such as Henry Kissinger and Yasser Arafat, both Nobel Peace Prize Laureates. Blair himself is noted for his "miracle" in resolving the conflict in Northern Ireland and has been duly endorsed by Silvio Berlusconi following the loss of his own legal immunity against pending prosecution (Berlusconi backs Blair for EU job, BBC News, 14 October 2009). However, Tom Lehrer said of Kissinger's award in 1973, It was at that moment that satire died. But, with the appointment of Blair, it would be reincarnated -- the cherry on the cake of European democracy (James Corbett, Lisbon Treaty: Will War Criminal Tony Blair become President of the European Union? Global Research, 3 October 2009).
Also a factor is the increasing percentage of the population -- of voters and taxpayers -- who themselves have a criminal record, necessarily with some justification as they would also claim. Under such circumstances it is appropriate to consider institutionalizing the appointment of those with such a record to positions of public office -- perhaps alternating with those without such a record or as parallel appointments. A precedent in Egyptian pharaonic administrations was the appointment of a "speaker" to accompany an official -- to "articulate" any message, as a modern "spin doctor" would clearly consider appropriate. But at what point is "spin" to be considered criminally misleading -- as with "dodgy dossiers" and mis-selling of financial derivatives -- even a crime against humanity?
Safeguarding voters and taxpayers against abuse: An innovation of this kind is of course dependent on rendering transparent to collective awareness the nature of such a criminal record -- rendering conscious that which currently troubles the collective unconscious. It might therefore be considered extraordinary, at a time when databases of every kind are being developed and integrated to track those with such records, that such information is not readily available to voters on those associated with the processes of governance.
This is all the more extraordinary at a time when Blair's Labour Party has just passed legislation requiring that all persons in contact with children should be subject to a check of their possible criminal record -- given the scandalous level of child abuse. Under the Vetting and Barring Scheme, anyone taking part in activities involving "frequent" or "intensive" contact with children or vulnerable adults, must register with the UK Home Office's Independent Safeguarding Authority. It is expected that some 11.3 million people in the UK will need to be registered in the database (Chris Green, Vetting database will cost NHS and public bodies £170m, The Independent, 11 September 2009).
Is there not a case for a similar check on those in official positions who might be expected to constitute a threat to "vulnerable" voters or taxpayers? Lord Tebbit, a former UK cabinet minister, speaking at the 2009 Conservative Party conference, argued that voters should not be "treated like children". If voters are to be treated like children in the processes of governance -- as is an increasingly recognized tendency in European democracies -- then surely analogous measures should be taken against voter abuse? Is there a need for a European Independent Safeguarding Authority?
President of Europe as Orchestral Conductor? At a time when the possibility of a future "Concert of Democracies" is envisaged, it is appropriate to consider the role of any conductor -- especially given the enthusiasm for Herbert von Karajan of Margaret Thatcher -- Tony Blair's own political inspiration. The following admirable account of the role of a symphonic conductor therefore merits consideration as a metaphor, especially when the role of President of Europe remains to be defined. |
The Myth of the Maestro Conductors are a mysterious breed. Oozing self-belief, elevated on a podium, they are endowed by critics and public alike with magical abilities. As the writer Elias Canetti observed: "There is no more obvious expression of power than the performance of a conductor." Yet for all this power, what they actually do remains an enigma.... You might say that while orchestras can play unaided, it is helpful if someone can follow a score and beat time clearly. That if they can also manage musicians with respect, as well as help shape a performance, so much the better. There are some who achieve this, whose passion is inspiring, whose insights provoke, reveal, or enhance. And there are a few who are great. They are usually the ones who place themselves wholly at the service of the music, who make working for them feel like a joyful, collaborative experience. But how much difference does the average conductor make? What can be said is that music, given players sufficiently accomplished, speaks for itself. Even in the case of the talented few maestri, the skills on offer are subject to an indefinable alchemy of charisma and self-belief. And as is the case with any dictator, what seems paramount is the ability to inspire confidence in their powers. You do not have to be a musician to wonder if such a nebulous yet omnipotent job description might be dangerous. |
| For further exploration of the relevance of the metaphor
for Europe: A Singable Earth Charter, EU Constitution or Global Ethic? 2006 Reframing the EU Reform Process -- through Song, 2008 |
References
Framing the Global Future by Ignoring Alternatives: unfreezing categories as a vital necessity, 2009
Viable Global Governance through Bullfighting: challenge of transcendence, 2009
Globallooning -- Strategic Inflation of Expectations and Inconsequential Drift, 2009
Lipoproblems: Developing a Strategy Omitting a Key Problem, 2009
Abuse of Faith in Governance: mystery of the unasked question, 2009
Emergence of a Global Misleadership Council: misleading as vital to governance of the future? 2007
Future Challenge of Faith-based Governance, 2003
Societal Learning and the Erosion of Collective Memory, 1980
|
For further updates on this site, subscribe here |
