To whom...,
Blair, Jospin and Schroeder were elected and all three times persons on this list (who were then on other lists) branded me a trouble-making naysayer, and possibly right-wing, for not joining in the celebration of "leftist" victory and instead predicting doom and peril. Those people are probably embarrassed enough but in case they need any proof that something went seriously wrong in Europe I refer them to Blair's performance at Prime Minister's question time this week. Specifically I cite an answer to a Conservative M.P. who, expanding on Blair's notion that Kosovo represented increased "credibility" for European security policy, asked whether increased credibility didn't demand increased capacity. Blair jumped on the point in the affirmative, thus explicitly endorsing the notion of re-arming Europe. That may make C. Redmond jump for joy, but in the history of bad ideas arming Europe has probably been the top performer. It is not incredible, certainly, but it is shocking the extent to which two politicians (Clinton and Blair) who cut their teeth on anti-war politics are happy to use war and armament blithely and seemingly without regard for even obvious danger in order to increase their political "credibility".
They are so obsessed with painting Milosovic as a WW2-style dictator, implying to them that more military might in Europe is the answer, they have forgotten the lessons of WW1 and are ignoring the threat of WW3. Right now some of the great war machines of any age are facing each other across the Balkans. Blair and Clinton seem to want to make those war machines bigger and give them a war to fight. It's by no means certain those machines will only end up fighting that war together, as intended.
peace