Arrival in Islamabad
Islamabad: Blairforce One has just touched down in the Pakistani capital. The prime minister is here for talks on Sunday with President Musharraf.
No meeting could better illustrate the moral and political ambiguities inherent in the "war on terror". No relationship better demonstrates the limits of that war's rhetoric of black and white certainties. No alliance better explains why the idea of reaching out to the Syria and/or Iran, is now fashionable - providing they, like Pakistan, become "part of the solution and not part of the problem" .
Tony Blair will hail President Musharraf as a key ally in the war on terror. He will, I suspect, hold back from praising him for his role in the battle to spread freedom and democracy. General Musharraf, it's worth remembering, only became president once he took control of his country in a military coup. Since then he has talked much about encouraging the development of democracy without ever being elected himself. He was "deemed to have been elected" after being backed by Pakistan's electoral college.
Musharraf will be praised for his help in countering the threat of Islamic terrorism in Britain and Pakistan will be rewarded with a doubling of development aid over the next three years. There will be less talk, no doubt, about the widespread belief that the Taliban's strength in Afghanistan depends on their ability to operate with impunity in parts of Pakistan with the support of either rogue or retired officers from Pakistan's intelligence service (ISI). That view has been expressed recently by NATO commanders, the Afghan government and a leaked Ministry of Defence thinktank paper. This after a year in which 18 British soldiers have died fighting the Taliban.
It's worth remembering too that - according to his own memoirs - Musharraf was not an instinctive ally in the war on terror. He claims that the Americans threatened to bomb his country back to the stone age if he didn't come on side. By his own account he then calculated whether he could resist. Only when he'd decided he could not did he make his decision to form an alliance with the West.
So, why has the prime minister come to Pakistan to praise rather than to bury our reluctant ally in the war on terror?
First, Pakistan's security services are credited in London with helping stop terror attacks at home - not least in helping to capture Dhrien Barot the terrorist who was jailed for life recently. On this trip Tony Blair will offer 拢8miilion to help them with forensics, dealing with IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and tackling terrorist finances.
The president's policy of "enlightened moderation" is welcomed in London since it has led him to take on Islamic hardliners in the Sharia courts, the universities and Islamic schools. Indeed, much of the increased development aid Britain is offering will go to subsidise his programme of reforming the madrassa system to ensure that it does not educate the terrorists of the future how to hate the West.
Musharraf, it is also noted, has stayed in office for 7 years and survived two assassination attempts for his troubles.
PS: Downing Street now says that Tony Blair's two words - - were a "straightforward slip of the tongue". Some tongue. Some slip.
I'm 
Comments
Nick Robinson wearyingly perpetuates the damaging approach to politics and politicians which was begun by Robin Day : the disdainful approach.
Robinson and his ilk have no responsibilities other than to the News Editor and their listening or watching figures, and they invariably seek to exaggerate and dramatise and make mountains where a molehill should be. It is boring, and wrong.
Nearly 40 years of this marinade - ever since TW3 - has turned most people off politics, reduced voting turnout, and built into generally accepted wisdom the idea that all political parties are the same, and that politicians are all bent and in it just for themselves. It's rubbish!
Some achievement. Some responsibility.
Informed, incisive comment is good.
No one could complain about that.
Serious, investigative journalism, too, can be wonderfully revealing.
But to lace every article with deep, primal disbelief, and an implicit or overt scorn can lead only to collapse - and it will happen unless political reporting is more balanced.
Fairer. Less vitriolic. Proportionate.
Talented, responsible people see only disaster in putting themselves forward only to have to put up with such unmerited libations of scorn.
The 91热爆 needs to show just a little more respect to whoever is trying - hard - to do any public, elected job.
It would be welcome.
James E Siddelley, Stockport
It is very true that this illustrates the ambiguities inherent in the "war on terror", but it pales into insignificance when one considers Mr. Blair's relationship with Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein, leader the political wing of the Irish terrorists, the IRA. Mr. Blair is insistent that he is opposed to international terrorism, yet he is adamant that Sinn Fein/IRA are an integral part of any devolved government in Northern Ireland. It therefore appears that international terrorism is frowned upon, yet internal terrorism is acceptable (perhaps highlighted by the journalist PJ O'Rourke's article "An acceptable level of violence").
Having seen the interview with Sir David Frost I wonder if, more accurately, those two words you mention were a "slip of the ear" rather than a slip of the tongue?
It strikes me the response was to a question about "difficulty" in Iraq rather than disaster.
And this is the Prime Minister who's supposed to be listening to us? With an ear that only hears what he wants?
A very concise article. However, Musharraf cannot continue to kill and supress his own people to please the west. His time is coming and the general Pakistani public are already know it. It is a shame, as Pakistani foreign policy has never really been for its own interests.
Musharraf is a dictator, he does not care about parliament and constitution.All of his crimes can be pardoned by knowing facts that he has taken a grip on Islamic extremists with iron hands ,he is doing efforts to make society moderate and he has taken steps to raise standards of women in Pakistan.I don't mind support of West for Musharraf.May be democracy is not for meant for Pakistan.
"Some tongue. Some slip."
Very true! Wasn't there a time when that tongue only slipped the way Tony Blair wanted it to, always saying the right thing?
The stress is getting to him.
Once again you've missed the point. Blair is in Pakistan to appear relevant to the British public (read war on terrorism).
Blair should have visited Pakistan when they had that dreadful earthquake last year to ensure that aid was flowing properly.
The PM should be doing more to engage all strands of muslim opinion in dialogue not just those he agrees with.
Its a welcome development that he is going to talk with Islamists on Interfaith Dialogue.
Only by talking and tackling the causes of terrorism will we defeat terrorism.
Can Mr Blair really expect General Musharraf's administration to accept certain terms and conditions merely by the use of praise and doubling aid? What else is on the table I wonder? Mr Blair is in quite a weak bargaining position (not withstanding the threat, veiled or otherwise, of extreme military persuasion is trying to seriously influence the direction and actions of a military dictatorship - how likely is that outcome? It's not as if the General has to worry about his standing in the polls etc, he is quite free to play both sides against each other if he chose to.
As for the "It has" incident. A lawyer and politician and Prime Minister of Mr Blairs experience does not make slips of the tongue. He has many, and is highly practiced at using, techniques for sidestepping difficult questions from journalists, MP鈥榮 and others. Is the Arabic news media reporting that Mr Blair made an embarrassing slip of the tongue or that he conceded that he had made a mistake in Iraq I wonder?
Hi Nick, just dropping a quick comment to say how much I'm enjoying the weblogs. It's great to have an inside perspective on the comings and goings of those in high office. It's all rather amusing at times. Keep it coming. Cheers, Justin.
I agree with the general content of the post. One thing , however , that has astounded a lot of us in India, is the naievity of the West in believing Prez Musharraf. All the top al Qaeda leaders that have been arrested, have been nabbed from the main Pakistani cities, not from the "caves in Waziristan". Also , is it a coincidence that a high profile terrorist is captured whenever the pressure is seen to be increasing on the Pak govt to deliver results. Osama Bin Laden will not be caught alive ( he can blab too much about the ISI's role - remember Daniel Pearl? ). For Prez Musharraf, Laden is the Golden Goose, and the Prez for one has sure learned his fables. ( Check out my post on the General at
Why is this such a big deal? Of course Iraq has been a disaster; has Blair ever said anything different - he hasn't said it has been a success - he hasn't said it has been a failure - admittedly now he says it is a disaster, but that is only stating the obvious.
And if you listen to the interview; it most certainly sounds as what the spokesperson suggests; not that great affirmation that would be expected with such a comment - but an off hand remark; nothing more.
It will be interesting how the cons play this one. Will Cameron actually make a comment and/or decision that sounds something remotely like foreign policy? It would be a first.
The most conservative projection is that it would take at least two decades to achieve change in the region whether a path of persuasion or coercion was taken. If Prime Minister Blair and President Musharraf can walk away with something small, concrete, and positive from their meeting, this success will be part of resolving the bigger picture.
President Musharraf is a very well trained, intelligent, and charismatic man. While it was unfashionable at the time I welcomed his coup d'茅tat as a necessary affirming of order and balance on a difficult situation. However, in spite of his abilities his handicap of divided loyalties is a troublesome characteristic that sets a bad leadership example.
My personal position on the World Trade Centre incident is the Americans had it coming, but the squabbling attitude in the Middle-East is just as bad. If progress is to be developed, some acknowledgement of this has to take place at some point but keeping the idea of building positive consensus at the top of the agenda should take priority.
Actually Musharraf was elected as president in a national referendum. Although he himself admitted that it was fixed.
How strange that when the army chief makes controversial statements on Iraq, the Prime Minister completely backs what he says. Yet he cannot agree with himself.
That's the same Downing Street, by the way, which claimed Cherie Blair had said "Can I get by" when she was overheard saying "It's a lie" about Gordon Brown's speech at the party conference.
"We'll bomb you back to the stoneage" outraged Richard Armitage to President Musharraf after 9/11/2001, if you do not comply. Pakistani compliance with Western "Democratic" ideals and norms is an obvious subject for historians one day.
It seems that Pakistan may have it both ways: ISI plus CIA, ISI plus Taliban,and ISI plus LTE, etc. Pakistan is using a double edged saracen sword in the War of Terror and how it does so is becoming more clear.
PM Blair is welcome to Pakistan. Dialogue is good. The strategy on "War on Terror" is evolving. Its a good time for talks.
I tend to agree with the first post here about the approach to political analysis of some of our journalists. Blair's words to Cameron in PMQs comes to mind here - "he hasn't had to make a difficult decision in his life".
Having said that I have noticed a certain reluctant admiration from Nick towards Blair in recent times. But, Nick is a wordsmith (like Blair) and can't help using the pithy turn of phrase when the occasion offers. Thus - "Some tongue. Some slip."
I don't think you're all that unempathic, Nick. You wrote very fairly and accurately about Blair flooring cameron in PMQs. And I know you have to keep your natural supporters (Tories and anti-Blairites coming back to this blog!)
That's realpolitik.
Which reminds me - the Prime Minister knows a thing or two about that too.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend", might well be his mantra while talking to the-maybe-not-so-benign almost-dictator in Pakistan.
Certainly Blair and the rest of us need a few friends in this uneasy world. I think he's doing a great job.
The relationship with Pakistan is what the West can reasonably expect from sovereign Muslim countries, many of whom have significant portions of their populations sympathetic to "Jihad against the western Crusaders". The terrorist ultimately are independent operators, an entire country or nationality cannot be blacklisted because of them.
Hi Nick, love the blog.
What worries me about Pakistan,it is a nuclear power and if Musharraf is forced out and the government is run by fundamentalists, what happens then? God help us all.
I do find it quite worrying that people who have never been to Pakistan make comments like 鈥淢ichele Fowler鈥 has about fundamentalists taking over.
Pakistan was the first Muslim country to have a female Prime Minster. On the whole Pakistani are modernistic in their thinking. It seems to me that the media only focus on the people who shout the loudest and that is the fundamentalist.
Fact of the matter is if Musharraf was kicked out today, it would be by the mainstream parties that would take over and not the fundamentalist as they just does not have the support.
" * James Siddelley wrote:
Nick Robinson wearyingly perpetuates the damaging approach to politics and politicians which was begun by Robin Day : the disdainful approach."
Politicians are worthy of nothing except disdain. Do not try to blame the electorate - that kind of thinking is utterly backwards.
Politicians with their obsession for control and lust for power have driven the cynicism of the electorate. Last week we had one of the PM's spin doctors claiming that blogs were causing people to become cynical about politics - what kind of arse-about-face thought process is that?
Labour, Lib Dem, Tory - all the same. Same left-wing, big-government, big-state interventionism. Blair's decade in office has been filled with corruption and lies far worse than anything the Tories perpetuated. If you doubt me, I suggest you pick up 'The Little Red Book of New Labour Sleaze' and take a read.
Give people direct representation and return power to local government, and you'll see cynicism weaken and activism improve rather than mock.
As to the PM's trip - has anyone else noticed that he spends very little time actually IN the UK doing anything? I, for one, am grateful since the longer he's out of the country the less damage he can do.