Ex-Prime Minister David Cameron, who has just resigned
even as an MP, barely a couple of months after quitting as Prime Minister, is a
true heir of ex-Prime Minister Tony
Blair, policy-wise though not
party-wise. In foreign policy terms both have pursued a policy of regime change
from Iraq and Syria to Libya, wreaking untold misery on the people of the
region.
Collectively around one million people have been
killed in the three countries and at least five times more made refugees
fleeing to Turkey and elsewhere with more than a million having reached Europe
in one of the biggest and bloodiest migrations since the Partition of India in
1947.
And this tragedy is still unfolding, without any light
at the end of the tunnel.
Orchestrated by the regime changing leaders in the
name of democracy, their actions have spawned demons like Daesh or IS, the
so-called Islamic State, and a variety of other fanatical forces.
One of the early assessments of David Cameron’s
‘ill-conceived’ military intervention in Libya comes from none other than the
House of Commons foreign affairs select committee which has a majority of
members from his own Tory party with a Tory chairman.
The report, like that of the ‘Chilcot’ inquiry into
the Iraq war, echoes the designs, lapses
and failures of Tony Blair’s
intervention in Iraq. In no uncertain terms, it slams Cameron’s Libyan
adventure which ‘was not informed by accurate intelligence’ – an echo of Tony
Blair’s handling of the Iraq situation which plunged the country into bloodshed
and chaos, still unresolved.
The report concurs with US President Barack Obama’s
observation that he Libyan war was “a shitshow.” In an interview with the Atlantic journal, Obama had expressed his
disappointment with the UK and France that their leadership had not done much
on stabilisation and reconstruction of Libya after the overthrow of the Gaddafi
regime. “ I had more faith in the Europeans, given Libya’s proximity, being
invested in the follow-up.”
The report points out: “By the summer of 2011, the
limited intervention to protect civilians (of Benghazi wo had broken away from
the Gaddafi ambit) had drifted into an opportunist policy of regime change.
That policy was not underpinned by a strategy to support and shape post-Gaddafi
Libya.
“The result was political and economic collapse,
inter-militia and inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian and migrant crises, widespread
human rights violations, the spread of Gaddafi regime weapons across the region
and growth of Islamic State in north Africa. Through his decision making in the
National Security Council, former prime minister David Cameron was ultimately
responsible for the failure to develop a coherent Libya strategy.”
Cameron’s failings in Libya, adds the report, mean
that Britain now has a ‘particular responsibility’ to assist the war ravaged
country and help deal with the flood of migrants heading for the shores to
Europe.”
Responsibility.
What responsibility? It’s a meaningless word in Blair-Cameron political
lexicon. In his first response to a question after the select committee
findings, Cameron is reported to have blamed the Libyan people for failing to
take the chance of democracy offered by him! Like God-fearing Blair, he is quite blasé about the whole affair and
perhaps equally unrepentant.
And on responsibility for the thousands of people who
have been killed or made refugees, the less said the better. During his reign
as prime minister he could go no further than promise to allow just 20,000
refugees from Syria, and that too over five years. Compare that with Germany’s
Chancellor Angela Merkel who boldly took in more than one million refugees,
uprooted not by German actions but expressly by the armed interventions of
Britain and France in Syria and Libya.
Blair still has no qualms about his role in the war
which, on a conservative British estimate, has caused 179,000 Iraqi civilian
deaths and cost 179 British soldiers’ lives since 2003. His comment on the war
and Chilcot report, if placed in a similar situation again, showed singular
defiance when he said: “ I’d take the same decision.” His bond of friendship
with the then US President George Bush that “I will be with you whatever...” is legend for ever.
The parliamentary committee’s report on Cameron’s war
record is only the beginning of criticism of his policies and more will
undoubtedly tumble out in days and months ahead. Yet like Blair he too will get away, pretty unscathed.
Perhaps that’s the nature of power play
and short public memory. More so, if it it’s happening to some people far away
and not at one’s own home. The long awaited ‘Chilcot’ inquiry report into
Blair’s doings is already looking a bit of history.
Equally, national leaders everywhere are remembered or
unremembered for their performance concerning events at home. On that score
both Cameron and Blair have a pretty good
record. Both protected and promoted initiatives and policies in the fields of school
education and national health service, in their own way. National economy and
jobs situation also held fairly well in comparison with European and other countries.
So, there is every chance that the two prime ministers,
like others before them, will get away with it all, not quite blameless nor quite
unsung.
........................................................................................................
