Surprise, surprise. The $100 million dollar man who has cashed in working for the banking industry is out there in strong defense of the banking industry. While some of his criticism of Gordon Brown may be fair, Blair has yet to realize that this is no longer 1997 before the economic collapse that ruined the lives of so many people around the world. Blair is obviously struggling to come to terms with the disaster that he helped bring to Iraq so adding one more catastrophe is one more than he can handle.
The political inner circles on the so-called left (think Bill Clinton, President Obama) still have yet to accept the failures of the banking greed culture that made so many promises yet delivered little outside of criminally high bonuses for the bankers. Leaders such as Blair and Clinton still believe that it's possible to cave in to business, strip regulation and then have everything work out. Sure, it's worked out well for both who make millions from the banks as consultants but for the rest, it's been a costly experiment.
And the UK's Freedom of Information Act? A terrible idea, says Tony. Lots more of the same old, same old Blair in all of his sickening arrogance and blindness.
On Iraq, Blair offers no change of heart but gives his most detailed defence yet of the policy of overthrowing Saddam Hussein in 2003. He writes emotionally of his anguish at not having anticipated "the nightmare that unfolded" after the initial success of toppling Saddam, and says he is devoting "a large part of the life left to me" to Middle East peace and interfaith reconciliation with the Muslim world.
He mounts a strong defence of the continuing war in Afghanistan and says that he would "not take a risk" of allowing Iran to acquire nuclear capability. However in his book Blair reveals that he "hesitated" before backing the renewal of Britain's Trident nuclear weapons in 2006.
Blair's outspoken remarks about the financial crisis and the aftermath of the British general election of 2010 in his book's postscript are likely to have a wide party political impact, especially his caution about any embrace of the view that "the state is back".
"The problem, I would say error, was in buying a package which combined deficit spending, heavy regulation, identifying banks as the malfeasants and jettisoning the reinvention of government in favour of the rehabilitation of government. The public understands the difference between the state being forced to intervene to stabilise the market and government back in fashion as a major actor in the economy."
