Political Lying Still Has Consequences
Paul Craig Roberts
Thursday, July 10, 2003
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has survived with a wrist slap
the first parliamentary committee's report on the false claims he made about
Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But other, more determined, inquiries are
under way, and a new imbroglio is brewing over what the proposed European
Constitution means for Britain.
A substantial minority of Blair's own Labor Party wants to make
him pay for lying his way to war. Cynics say that it is not Blair's lies – a politician's stock in trade – that upset the left wing of his party.
Instead, the anger comes from Blair having manipulated his country into
supporting a foreign military adventure led by an American Republican
president.
The British political left wing already was displeased with
Blair because of his moderate domestic policies. Blair's support of the
U.S.-led invasion of Iraq convinced them that he is indeed a turncoat.
Iraq could still bring about Blair's downfall, especially if a
Shiite uprising in the south were to massacre the remaining British
occupation forces. But, all in all, for the British Iraq is about losing a
few lives in support of American foreign policy, something that Americans
did for the British to far greater extent in World War II.
Potentially, a greater threat to Blair comes from what Michael
Pinto-Duschinsky, writing in the Times Literary Supplement, calls the
"deliberate obfuscation" by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the
meaning of the European Constitution for British sovereignty. Britain is
disappearing without a debate, and this is a deception that means something.
Readers familiar with the hilarious TV series "Yes, Minister,"
depicting the power of the unaccountable permanent government over British
cabinet ministers, will have no difficulty understanding Pinto-Duschinsky's
analysis.
A decade ago, Pinto-Duschinsky undertook to do an investigative
series for the London Times about the boundary between British government
and European Union authority over a range of mundane everyday matters, such
as the requirement for seat belts in buses. The idea was to illustrate the
erosion of sovereignty via the loss of power over a large number of small
matters.
Pinto-Duschinsky reports that after two articles in the series
were published, he was called to the Cabinet Office and told by a senior
official that instructions had been issued throughout the government that no
one was permitted to speak with him except press officers. "It was
considered impolitic," he writes, "to let readers of The Times (or cabinet
ministers, for that matter) know whether the British government had the
power to take decisions on hundreds of everyday matters of policy and
administration."
That was a decade ago. Today, "the British public is being
subjected to a barrage of statements about the European Constitution's
supposed unimportance." The document that abolishes national sovereignty is
being presented as "a mere 'tidying-up' exercise," a "simplification of
existing treaties."
There are two levels of obfuscation. The British people are
being misled about the implications for their sovereignty and system of law
of being submerged into a 21-country political union. On top of this, the
European Constitution itself is an obfuscation. Who will determine its
meaning?
Pinto-Duschinsky points out that the Constitution is written in
abstruse, unusual words that require a special dictionary and in ordinary
words assigned special meanings. Multiply these terminological complexities
by the 21-languages of the European Union, and the result is legal
pandemonium.
Add to this Pinto-Duschinsky's list of seven different visions
of the meaning and purpose of European Union. The outcome: "Bureaucrats and
judges are bound to gain power at the expense of voters." People will
"participate" in their governance the way audiences participate in sports
events.
The incremental erosion of British sovereignty since 1973 has
allowed a succession of prime ministers to evade a national debate. The
cumulative effect of the incremental deals leaves Tony Blair facing the
abolition of Britain on his watch. Blair cannot pass on the sinking ship,
Sovereignty, to the next watch.
National extinction has a way of focusing the mind. Although
many Britons are demoralized by the erosion of British values resulting from
Third World immigration and asylum-seekers, others seem determined to remain
British as long as immigration permits. If Tony Blair turns his countrymen
into Europeans without their consent, he will have raised deception to new
heights.
Dr. Roberts' latest book, "The Tyranny of Good Intentions," has been published by Prima Publishers.
Copyright 2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Saddam Hussein/Iraq
Editor's note:
Free Offer – get up to $60 in books FREE with NewsMax Magazine –Click Here Now