The legend of the Knights of the Round Table inspired the king who created, in the fourteenth century, the Order of the Garter. For having restored the authority of royalty that his father’s reign had overshadowed and for having strengthened England militarily, Edward III could give immense prestige to the order of chivalry that he designed emulating the intention of the King Arthur when he gathered the most valuable and worthy men in the court of Camelot.
The order with which Elizabeth II honored Tony Blair It is the oldest and most prestigious in Great Britain. That explains the storm of criticism that the monarch received for appointing a knight of the Garter to the former prime ministeror. Even a newspaper with progressive positions such as The Guardian refrained from defending the Labor leader. On the contrary, he described the queen’s decision as “reckless”.
Why so much rejection for a leader who ruled for a decade and had no bad results to be distinguished? For the worst of his decisions: having supported George W. Bush in a military adventure justified with lies and with disastrous consequences that generate instability, destruction and deaths to this day.
Should have listened to Robin Cook. They had started Labor militancy together in Scotland and he was put in charge of the Foreign Office when he became Prime Minister. But Robin Cook was raising the tone of his warnings about the error that would imply invading Iraq, with the aggravating circumstance of not having the endorsement of the UN Security Council. That is why he resigned, questioning in harsh terms the summit in the Azores between Bush Jr., Blair and the Spanish head of government José María Aznar to launch a vast military operation aimed at crush Saddam Hussein’s regime.
The Iraqi leader was a psychopath with an addiction to crimes against humanity, but he had had nothing to do with 9/11 since, expressing secular Arab nationalism, he was on the sidewalk facing Osama Bin Laden and ultra-Islamist terrorism. To make matters worse, the inspections of the team of experts led by the Swedish Hans Blix had reached the conclusion that Saddam did not have arsenals of mass destruction.
Cook resigned from his position, leaving it in the hands of Jack Straw, and stayed on his bench in the House of Commons until he died a couple of years later of a heart attack, in the mountains of northern Scotland. The years that followed proved him right. The military adventure Bush turned Iraq into a black hole. that festered delirious extremisms that multiplied jihadism in the Middle East, Asia and Africa.
Even achieving something positive, such as the fall of Saddam Hussein’s criminal regime, the negligence of Paul Bremer, that sort of viceroy sent to Baghdad by Pentagon chiefs Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, by dismantling and abolishing the Iraqi army, paved the way for that he ultra-Islamist fanaticism most lunatic and bloodthirsty started their own wars.
Already turned into a black hole, Iraq absorbed all the military energy that the United States and its allies needed to definitively eradicate the Taliban in Afghanistan. That is why the catastrophic withdrawal poorly agreed by Trump and poorly executed by Biden is a late consequence of that disastrous warmongering adventure undertaken by Bush Jr. and his vice president, Dick Cheney. And that dark side of that Labor government justifies so much criticism of the queen for having distinguished him by naming him Sir Anthony Charles Lynton BlairKnight of the Order of the Garter.
If he had listened to Robin Cook, the signatures on notes repudiating his appointment would not have exceeded half a million in just four days. Had it not been for the Iraqi mess, neither the Conservatives nor the left would have questioned his awarding him the highest distinction of the British crown. The management that he headed between 1997 and 2007 it was a soft end to the thatcherite era, which the Tory successor of the “iron lady”, John Major, had prolonged in the economic field, although with a more friendly gesture.
Tony Blair had proclaimed the “New Labor” taking as a guide the ideas promoted by the sociologist Anthony Guiddens, author of the Structuring Theory. Blairist “new labourism” was based on the Third Way, Guiddens’ theory that questioned both the “conservative revolution” of Reagan and Thatcher as well as Marxist leftism and the markedly statist leftism, proposing new instruments to modernize European social democracy.
But the Third Way is not the most visible mark left by Blair’s passing by the British government, but the invasion that bogged down the Western allies in Iraq. That is why it is understandable that Blair’s inclusion in a distinction normally received by war heroes, well-loved and emblematic artists of British culture, and scientists who make relevant contributions has been so criticized. This year, together with the former prime minister, the queen conferred the knighthood on scientists and doctors fighting the pandemic.
The question is, then, why the queen decided to grant a distinction knowing that it would be highly questioned. Perhaps the answer is: out of gratitude to Tony Blair. After all, that young center-left premier He was the most unexpected and successful of his advisers during the social earthquake that caused the death of Lady Di.
The gigantic wave of popular sorrow generated by the tragic disappearance of the princess, who had made her sadness visible, had a direct impact on the image of the royal family. By the way, the most affected in his image was prince charles, for having been in the eyes of the people the husband who made her unhappy. The second most affected image was that of Isabel II, perceived as the harsh and aloof mother-in-law who coldly treated Diana Spencer.
During the peak of the wave of sadness, floated the feeling that the crown could shipwreck in that ocean of popular commotion. It was evident that the queen did not know how to handle herself, how to act, what things to say publicly in such a circumstance.
Despite coming from a political force without much attachment to the monarchy, Tony Blair perceived the drift of Elizabeth II and her loneliness in that dramatic setting, with no one around her who knew how to guide her, no one to teach her to be sensitive and hurt. That is why he approached him with intelligent and timely advice.
The queen felt cared for by that Labor leader from Edinburgh. And he probably felt, in the twilight of his reign, that he should be grateful for this unexpected and crucial help.
