Blair's Rhetoric of Conviction

UK prime minister Tony Blair has struck a strong note in the face of opposition on Iraq. 'I believe in it', he told Jackie Ashley in the Guardian. 'Let the day-to-day judgements come and go', he said, 'Be prepared to be judged by history.' (1)

'There is a sense of overwhelming determination', wrote Jackie Ashley. 'When others are beset by doubts and anxieties, I ask where his conviction comes from.' (2)

But what is interesting is how Blair has been forced down this line of argument. Neither the public nor parliament has been convinced by the need for war with Iraq. While during the Kosovo conflict in 1999 Blair was able to talk in general terms about 'good' versus 'evil', he has now had to fall back on his personal conviction and the judgement of history.

Under the pressure of the past few weeks, Blair has tried many different approaches to convince people of the need for war -- threatening or cajoling, and gearing his appeals to different audiences. He has shifted away from formal arguments about UN resolution 1441, and increasingly attempts to win the moral case. And as Blair's support has fallen away, this case has become more personalised.

As the anti-war demonstration approached on 15 February, it was clear that Blair was beginning to lose the moral high-ground in the debate. The night before the march, Blair's official spokesman said that the number of people on the demonstration was the same as the number of Kurds who fled 'into the mountains' from Saddam at the end of the 1991 Gulf War (3). New Labour officials also pointed out that such a demonstration would not be possible under Saddam's regime, and the spokesman declared Saddam's regime 'tyrannical, dictatorial and evil'.

But there were also attempts to make contact with the marchers' concerns. Blair's spokesman said that the government was in no doubt the demonstrators 'are motivated by the best intentions and believe sincerely in their views', and said that 'the prime minister respects that' (4).

On the day of the anti-war rally, Blair moved his speech at the Labour Party spring conference back to 10:15 a.m. so that it would be reported before the march began. He said that the consequences of ignoring Saddam would be dire: 'weakness will be paid in blood.' (5)

At this point, he began to talk about his personal conviction, and the need for leadership. 'I do not seek unpopularity as a badge of honour', he said. 'But sometimes it is the price of leadership. And it is the cost of conviction.'

Again, there was an attempt to present his case in moral terms. Blair insisted that he had a 'moral purpose' equal to that of the protesters, and quoted an email he had received from a 19-year-old student, whose parents had fled Iraq, which he later handed out to the delegates. (This was slightly marred when it transpired that sections of the letter were actually quotations from a column by Guardian journalist David Aaronovitch.) (6)

Three days after the anti-war rally, Blair's tone was less assertive, and his arguments suggested that he was attempting to take many of the anti-war movement's concerns on board. Many of those on the demonstration had complained that there was a rush to war. On the 18 February press conference, Blair said that 'there is no rush to war. Indeed we have waited 12 years' (this quote was flagged up in press releases) (7).

Another of the protesters' accusations was that Blair was not listening to them, and that he thought he was God. At the press conference, Blair turned the issue around, professing humility and complaining that the protesters weren't listening to him. 'Look I don't pretend to have a monopoly of wisdom in these issues, or I always know what is right and everyone else is wrong, I don't say that at all. I totally understand why people want to march and protest against what we are doing. I just ask people to listen to the other side of the argument.' (8)