So, the other day I mentioned briefly that I’d seen this. It’s a website that will let people donate to a campaign, specifically the Arrest Blair campaign. The founder, George Monbiot wrote the following to describe it:
“This site offers a reward to people attempting a peaceful citizen’s arrest of the former British prime minister, Tony Blair, for crimes against peace. Anyone attempting an arrest which meets the rules laid down here will be entitled to one quarter of the money collected at the time of his or her application.”
Mr. Monbiot says he is doing it:
“- To remind people that justice has not yet been done.
- To show Mr Blair that, despite his requests for people to “move on” from Iraq, the mass murder he committed will not be forgotten.
- To put pressure on the authorities of the United Kingdom and the countries he travels through to prosecute him for a crime against peace, or to deliver him for prosecution to the International Criminal Court.
- To discourage other people from repeating his crime“
Unless you’ve been living under a rock or are not British, I’m sure you’ll know that the Iraq inquiry has been going on for months now. Various people have given evidence and been interrogated – including one Mister Tony Blair himself. If you’re not up to speed with the enquiry and what’s going on, here and here are excellent links.
So, the main point of this post. What I think about Arrest Blair. Surely, I should start this by writing about what I think of the Iraq war itself?
Well, not really.
Because what I think about the Iraq war, in this case, doesn’t really matter.
I’m not saying that what people think about the war isn’t important, of course it is. The morality of the war is something that should be debated, as should whether or not we should have gone to war. As many different opinions as possible need to be heard, it’s an issue that should be looked at from as many angles as possible in order to come close to some kind of truth or conclusion. But whatever conclusion we eventually come to by doing this, that’s not what’s important here. There is a huge difference between something immoral and something illegal, and here what needs to be explored is the latter – not was the war immoral, but was it illegal.
The government, more than anyone, need to obey laws. Politicians have placed themselves in an institution, and they either need to have total trust in that institution and therefore follow it and live by the ideals it sets out, or they need to set out to change it. When a government or a politician breaks a law, it is the worst kind of betrayal and hypocrisy. These are supposed to be people that we can place our trust in. If they can’t honour that trust, then they don’t deserve to have it in the first place and should relinquish that trust. By that, I mean that they should be forced to leave parliament, and they should certainly be punished as any other citizen would be for what they have done.
I’m not saying that they have to be squeaky clean – that would be impossible. I don’t care if a politician has had an affair, or has a BDSM fetish, or smoked cannabis when they were younger. The first is not illegal, just immoral, the second is purely a matter of taste, and the second is something they did long ago. None affect their power to lead the country, and none of them break the law at that moment- with the cannabis example, it’s in the past. But as soon as they enter politics, they better damn well obey the laws, because without it they lose the trust of the public and what is the point of appointing a leader if you cannot trust them? None, and so without trust they should be gotten rid of.
So, back to Arrest Blair. Should it go ahead?
In one way, I think yes. I found about this campaign via this article, and if what it says is true then yes, the war was illegal, and as I have said, I think that anyone who breaks a law should be punished for it, especially if they’re in a position of trust like in government. Blair was a democratic leader at the time of the war, and in a democracy we are allowed (and supposed to) show what we think. Arrest Blair is ordinary citizens showing what they think and believe.
But in another way, no. Arrest should be about punishment, and punishment shouldn’t be about vengeance, but reform. I’ve always thought that smacking a child to punish it should be allowed – but the smacking shouldn’t be done in anger, it should be done calmly and with no intention but to punish the child, not make the parent feel better. This same system applies to this. Does Mr. Monbiot want to arrest Blair because he feels that such action is just and needed, or because he has a personal desire to see Blair punished? I don’t think it’s the former. I know there’s the argument that the campaign is in itself just a way of gathering publicity and showing the government what The People want and they don’t actually need anyone to arrest Blair…but there’s currently a £10045.99 fund, a quarter of which will go to anyone who performs the citizen arrest, and people will start to act on it for the money. One person already has.
So, what do I think? I suppose the easiest way of saying what I think about the issue is this: Blair should be arrested and punished if the war actually was illegal, but not by this campaign. If it is illegal, then the arrest and punishment should be issued on behalf of the Iraq inquiry. Sadly, I think there’s more chance of a magic elephant flying down from the heavens with Wonderwoman’s lasso of justice than that actually happening. Like Sam Burnett says here – it seems to be more a political show than anything else. Maybe that’s what we should be focusing our efforts on objecting to.