首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
When Tony Blair was elected to Britain’s House of Commons in 1983; he was just 30, the Labour Party’s youngest M.P. Labour had
When Tony Blair was elected to Britain’s House of Commons in 1983; he was just 30, the Labour Party’s youngest M.P. Labour had
admin
2021-10-13
21
问题
When Tony Blair was elected to Britain’s House of Commons in 1983; he was just 30, the Labour Party’s youngest M.P. Labour had just fought and lost a disastrous election campaign on a far-left platform, and Margaret Thatcher, fresh from her victory in the Falklands War, was in her pomp. The opposition to Thatcher was limited to a few ancient warhorses and a handful of bright young things. Blair, boyish Blair, quickly became one of the best of the breed.
Nobody would call Blair, 54 on May 6, boyish today. His face is older and beaten up, his reputation in shreds. Very soon, he will announce the timetable for his departure from office. In a recent poll for the Observer newspaper, just 6% of Britons said they found Blair trustworthy, compared with 43% who thought the opposite. In Britain—as in much of the rest of the world—Blair is considered an unpopular failure.
I’ve been watching Blair practically since he entered politics—at first close up from the House of Commons press gallery, later from thousands of miles away. In nearly a quarter-century, I have never come across a public figure who more consistently asked the important questions about the relationships between individuals, communities and governments or who thought more deeply about how we should conduct ourselves in an interconnected world in which loyalties of nationality, ethnicity and religion continue to run deep. Blair’s personal standing in the eyes of the British public may never recover, but his ideas, especially in foreign policy, will long outlast him.
Britons (who have and expect an intensely personal relationship with their politician) love to grumble about their lot and their leaders, especially if—like Blair— they’ve been around for a decade. So you would never guess from a few hours down the pub how much better a place Britain is now than it was a decade ago. It’s more prosperous, it’s healthier, it’s better educated, and—with all the inevitable caveats about disaffected young Muslim men—it is the European nation most comfortable with the multicultural future that is the fate of all of them. It would be foolish to give all the credit for the state of this blessed plot to Blair but equally foolish to deny him any of it.
In today’s climate, however, this counts for naught compared with the blame that Blair attracts for ensnaring Britain in the fiasco of Iraq. As the Bush Administration careered from a war in Afghanistan to one in Iraq, with Blair always in support, it became fashionable to say the Prime Minister had become the President’s poodle.
This attack both misreads history and misunderstands Blair. Long before 9/11 shook up conventional thinking in foreign affairs, Blair had come by two beliefs he still holds: First, that it is wrong for the rest of the world to sit back and expect the U.S. to solve the really tough questions. Second, that some things a state does within its borders justify intervention even if they do not directly threaten another nation’s interests. Blair understood that today any country’s problems could quickly spread. As he said in a speech in 2004, "Before Sept. 11, I was already reaching for a different philosophy in international relations from a traditional one that has held sway since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648—namely, that a country’s internal affairs are for it and you don’t interfere unless it threatens you, or breaches a treaty, or triggers an obligation of alliance."
Blair’s thinking crystallized during the Kosovo crisis in 1999. For Blair, the actions of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic were so heinous that they demanded a response. There was nothing particularly artful about the way he put this. In an interview with Blair for a TV film on Kosovo after the war, I remember his justifying his policy as simply "the right thing to do." But Blair was nobody’s poodle. He and Bill Clinton had a near falling-out over the issue of ground troops. (Blair was prepared to contemplate a ground invasion of Kosovo, an idea that gave Clinton’s team the vapors.) The success of Kosovo—and that of Britain’s intervention to restore order in Sierra Leone a year later—emboldened Blair to think that in certain carefully delineated cases the use of force for humanitarian purposes might make sense. As far back as 1999, he had Iraq on his mind. In a speech in Chicago at the height of the Kosovo crisis, Blair explicitly linked Milosevic with Saddam Hussein: "two dangerous and ruthless men."
In office, moreover, Blair had become convinced of the dangers that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed. He didn’t need 9/11 to think the world was a risky place. As a close colleague of Blair’s said to me in 2003, just before the war in Iraq, "He is convinced that if we don’t tackle weapons of mass destruction now, it is only a matter of time before they fall into the hands of rogue states or terrorists. If George Bush wasn’t pressing for action on this, Blair would be pressing George Bush on it." To those who knew him, there was simply never any doubt that he would be with the U.S. as it responded to the attacks or that he would stay with the Bush Administration if it close to tackle the possibility that Iraq had WMD.
The Prime Minister, of course, turned out to be disastrously wrong. By 2003, Iraq was already a ruined nation, long incapable of sustaining a sophisticated WMD program. And the Middle East turned out to be very different from the Balkans and West Africa. In a region where religious loyalties and fissures shape societies and where the armies of "the West" summon ancient rivalries and bitter memories, it was naïve to expect that an occupation would quickly change a society’s nature. "When we removed the Taliban and Saddam Hussein," Blair told Congress in 2003, "this was not imperialism. For these oppressed people, it was their liberation." But we have learned the hard way that it is not for the West to say what is imperialism and what is liberation. When you invade someone else’s country and turn his world upside down, good intentions are not enough.
Yet that on its own is not a sufficient judgment on Tony Blair. He will forever be linked to George Bush, but in crucial ways they saw the world very differently. For Blair, armed intervention to remove the Taliban and Saddam was never the only way in which Islamic extremism had to be combated. Far more than Bush, he identified the need to settle the Israel-Palestine dispute—"Here it is that the poison is incubated," he told Congress—if radical Islam was to lose its appeal. In Britain, while maintaining a mailed fist against those suspected of crimes, he tried to treat Islam with respect. He took the lead in ensuring that the rich nations kept their promises to aid Africa and lift millions from the poverty and despair that breed support for extremism. The questions Blair asked—When should we meddle in another nation’s life? Why should everything be left to the U.S.? What are the wellsprings of mutual cultural and religious respect? How can the West show its strength without using guns? —will continue to be asked for a generation. We will miss him when he’s gone.
Which of the following statements is NOT true according to the passage?
选项
A、Tony Blair has his own thinking in foreign affairs rather than follow anyone.
B、Tony Blair makes a disastrous mistake in following George Bush in foreign affairs.
C、People think that Tony Blair follows George Bush in the policies on the Middle East.
D、People are wrong when they think Tony Blair is a follower of American’s foreign policy.
答案
B
解析
作者试图证明布莱尔在外交政策方面有自己的观点,而不是像人们所认为的那样(C、D)跟随布什(A)。故B为正确答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/VqIK777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
Working-classfamiliesintheUnitedStatesareusuallynuclear,andmanystudiesindicatethatworking-classcouplesmarryfor
A、Superviseapprentice.B、Writereferenceletters.C、Keeprecordsandcarryoutplans.D、Identifypotentialtalents.CMissChan说
HowInterpretersWork?I.UnderstandingA.Aboutwordsandexpressions—【T1】______wordsmaybeleftout:【T1】______—Ifnotknow
FiveCommonMistakesinConversationsandTheirSolutionsI.NotlisteningA.Problem:mostpeople【T1】______【T1】______—waite
AspectsthatMayFacilitateReadingI.Determiningyour【T1】______【T1】______A.Readingfor【T2】______:【T2】______likeread
AspectsthatMayFacilitateReadingI.Determiningyour【T1】______【T1】______A.Readingfor【T2】______:【T2】______likeread
Self-discipline:theFoundationofProductiveLivingI.Issuestobenoticedatthethoughtofself-disciplineA.Troublesfors
Self-discipline:theFoundationofProductiveLivingI.Issuestobenoticedatthethoughtofself-disciplineA.Troublesfors
Timesamplingmeansthatresearcherschoosevarioustimeintervalsfortheirobservation.Intervalsmaybeselectedsystematical
A、Perfect.B、Businesslike.C、Demanding.D、Agressive.A
随机试题
甲是一名在校学生,因在课上玩手机,甲的手机被李老师没收了,课后甲多次索要手机,李老师都拒绝归还。下列说法错误的是()。
某施工单位承接了一条高速公路施工任务,设计车速120km/h,路面面层为三层式沥青混凝土结构。施工为大型公路专业施工企业,设施精良,技术力量雄厚。为保证工程施工质量,施工中有如下事件发生:事件1:选用合格的石料进行备料,严格对下承层进行清扫,并在
按子项目组成编制的施工成本计划,首先要把项目总施工成本分解到( )中去。
合规政策内容不包括()。
个人经营类贷款的特征主要有()。
小明在学习“三角形”这一概念时,联系之前学过的“角”的概念弄清楚三角形的意义,最后将它纳入自己的知识系统,保留在记忆中。这种记忆方法属于()。
马克思主义哲学的基石是()。
“红军不怕远征难,万水千山只等闲。”当年红军“远征”的直接原因是()。
有一段路,原计划每天修0.48千米,15天可完成,因为时间紧急,每天多修0.12千米,则可提前()天完成修路。
Theprocessbymeansofwhichhumanbeingsarbitrarilymakecertainthingsstandforotherthingsmanybecalledthesymbolicpr
最新回复
(
0
)