War Against The Nation-State (contd.): Blair Lies Betray Britain


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 underway, and a
new imbroglio is brewing over what the proposed

European Constitution
means for Britain.

A substantial minority of Blair`s own Labour Party
want 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
[pay archive]
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 Mr.
Pinto-Duschinsky`s analysis.

A decade ago Mr. 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.

Mr. 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?

Mr. 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 EU and the
result is legal pandemonium.

Add to this Mr. 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.

Paul Craig Roberts is
the author of The


New Color Line: How Quotas And Privilege Destroy
Democracy
, with Lawrence
M. Stratton.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS
SYNDICATE, INC.