ENG ASSIGNMENT

Tony Blair: a disaster? Think again...

Ten years is quite a long time, depending on your profession. For sports players, ten years may be the period between the date they made their debuts and the date they exit the sports scene with bank accounts full of money, or with nothing. To the people of UK, these 10 years was a mixed period. Mr Tony Blair, who rose to the position of Prime Minister in 1997, announced that he would be stepping down on June 27th. Love him or hate him, there is no denying that he has done much for the welfare of his country. As praises from world leaders came in since his announcement, the people of the world, especially those of the UK, should remember that it is this very guy who “united” the country following the recent bomb attacks and the tragic death of Princess Diana. Moreover, the long-standing problem, which has resulted in violent confrontations, between North Ireland and Britain was resolved in Blair’s time as he deftly handled the peace progress. Countless prime ministers of Britain did not manage to do it, yet he did it. So can he still be considered a disaster? Lastly, as the man said it himself, "There is only one government since 1945 that can say all of the following: more jobs, fewer unemployed, better health and education results, lower crime and economic growth in every quarter. Only one government, this one” (quoted from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6639945.stm).
However, not everyone has given positive comments about Blair. Residents of Iraq hope that the stepping down of Blair would signal a withdrawal of British troops while a minister from Zimbabwe hopes that Blair would be haunted by the children of Afghanistan and Iraq who were killed by the British troops. Clearly, the blot on an otherwise perfect record of Blair would be his policies about the war on terror. An irony is that he had won support due to his declaration of war on terror, yet his actions, e.g. war against Iraq, would be remembered by the British for the wrong reasons. The war against Iraq, which so far bore no evidence of peace in the country, much less for weapons of mass destruction, would be the incident that people would remember, or hate, him for. How unfair can we be?
As we are reaching the end of what was thought as a highly-promising period of time for the British, we may feel a tinge of sympathy for Blair. Being the youngest ever Prime Minister to be voted in for more than a century, expectations were high. However, being young would also mean that these expectations would be hard to fulfil. As the man said himself, he was sorry to the people of UK that he could not fulfil their expectations. However, could he have done more? Mistakes like the farce of Iraq could have been avoided, but while it was too costly, isn’t it better than dragging your country into disaster? (Think Hitler)