±«Óãtv

Syria is a major force in the Middle East. Attempting to simply 'cut-out' countries we don't have particularly friendly relations with is really not an option. Especially not when we're dabbling in what is effectively their local politics. I wish people would stop rabbiting on about Blair's 'legacy' and accept that he is committed to trying for a lasting peace in the Middle East and this blatantly cannot be achieved without involving Syria in some way.

I agree that Syria is a key player in creating peace in the area. The point is that Afghanistan and Iraq lie either side of the nuclear proud Iranians and that is the issue. Iran and Syria share a common approach to Hezbollah and influencing the region. Neither of them want a democratic pro-Western country sitting amongst them when there is already the pro-Western Pakistan, Israel and Jordan already there. Syria is more likely to succumb to our charms and that is probably the aim. Once Iran is totally isolated (how naive) then it will become a more reasonable player in the Middle East.

Maybe it is futile, a lost cause, never going to happen etc. But at least Blair is trying and having a go. It was not long ago that most of the population, the political commentators and everyone worth their salt, except for the Northern Ireland Secretary (the hardest, most impossible job in the cabinet), believed peace in NI was impossible.
If we do not try for peace, then there is no chance of achieving peace.

It is the people who have the drive, the vision and the desire, despite all the obstacles, who will achieve peace. The Iron Curtain is down, Apartheid is no more, The IRA have disarmed. None of these outcomes may be perfect (Hungary, crime & AIDS in SA,Crime in NI) , but they are significantly better than before. Why not peace in the Middle East? Those that say we should not try because it is too difficult are accepting the status quo too readily.

It's clear that many people have underestimated Assad, he's a sharp political operator to have survived a very difficult period governing his fractious society.

Prospects of a formal peace deal between Syria and Israel are higher than for many years, now that both sides realise just how much they need each other. Such a deal could be a catalyst for further positive developments in the region.

I strongly support this move by the UK.

Having just finished reading Patrick Cockburn's book 'The Occupation', as well as his continuing articles in 'The Independent', the dissonance between what he says and what the Government says is happening in Iraq is huge. If Blair is serious about talking to Syria, I applaud him - we should be talking to everybody and anybody who can help get the Iraqi citizens out of the terrifying position they now appear to be in. The comments from Jitesh about NI are correct - Blair put his neck on the line in talking to the IRA and was right to do so.

Sometimes i wonder how Tony Blair can even find number 10 Downing street with his head stuck so firmly up his own backside. Surely he must realise that everybody knows that this is just another case of Mr Blair trying to find an issue he can call his 'legacy'. Having so many disasters on his record will not be negated by finding one issue that he actually has a positive outcome on.

Did he not get the message during the recent Israel/Lebanon crisis that you can't be an 'agent provocateur' and then try and be the peace maker. This man allowed the US bombs to 'stop off' in the uk on the way to killing innocent women and children and then tried once again to'find his legacy' by proporting to be the peace maker.

When will it sink in to Tony Blair that his real legacy has been to follow the US blindly in everything it does, which generally involves killing people and breaking the Geneva convention, and like it or not, this has bred an insipid hatred of the US in many many countries around the world. How can he possibly think that people in the middle east are ever going trust him.

I’ve found that developing a winning deal with people who agree in principle but allow their ego to get in the way is very, very difficult. As Jitesh (#3) commentated, there are those who will cling onto the negative and backward looking dominant picture, but good leadership, engagement, and persistence can turn this around.

While the vision of Middle-East with peaceful trade, cultural, and political relations is dazzling, the fear of losing current positions is likely to be what’s holding people back. If Prime Minister Blair can develop a situation where the various stakeholders feel comfortable, then engagement and a better outcome will begin to emerge.

As a Daoist, Buddhist, and martial artist, I see how one thing flows into another, how tails wag dogs, and how better ways lead to better results. I spit in the faces of the privileged whose ingrained stupid impoverishes their people and the whiners who are content with crumbs. Building positive consensus is hard but the best outcome.

Making love is more profitable than war in the long-term.

I have heard from sources of mine who work in Downing Street that Tony Blair plans to leave office around the end of march to coincide with the new northern ireland assembly being set up,and before disastrous results in the may elections.Perhaps you could enlighten us as to the validity of these reports Nick?

Odd that isn't it?
How in the famous exchange caught 'off-mike' between Blair and Bush, Blair offers to go to the Middle East as somekind of inspirational world leader and Bush nay-says the idea stright away.
And the day we have Blair and Syria mentioned in the same breath- especially Blair, Syria, not following America's line- what do we get?

Ohhh... Syria and Iran and Hezbollah trying to overthrow Lebanon.
Hezbollah's unreasonable demands on Lebanon have been known for a while.
The timing of the White House statement? Coincidence? Maybe.

But then again- given his eagerness at foreign policy- why DO we have a foreign minister anymore? Tony has been ignoring those who show any spark of independence (Cook), or chosing yes men (like Straw) who will never fight, and basically ignored the foreign office for almost his entire term in office.
Blair is pursuing a fools hope. He cannot see that he lost all credability with the debacle over a second UN resolution all those years ago- and wonders as the leader of a centre-left party whose only allies nowadays are right wing leaders, why many around the world find him faintly and pathetically amusing.

Isolation is really a US tactic, and one that's worked really rather well for North Korea. Blair would do well to follow it. Maintaining a dialogue with Damascus, and trying to shake them from the path they're going down can only lead to prospects for a Syria that works well with other. Thankfully, Blair's lunatic attempts are a long-shot. Now, if he can only follow the US in their attitude towards Hezbollah and work to maintain a 'no-state-is-safe' policy in Palestine, we can continue with the productive situation we're in. After all, arms manufacturers need to feed their kids too.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Strangelove

I was in Damascus recently and can tell you Mr Blair's stock is very low. The Syrians, like many, realise that progress can only be made once he and President Bush are gone. People are pragmatic and patient, and are prepared to play a longer game than fitting in to Mr Blair's departure timetable.

Somewhat bizarrely you claim that Blair was greeted surprisngly warmly in his recent trip to the Middle East but at the time the ±«Óãtv's own reporting claimed:

....UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has held talks with the Lebanese government, amid angry protests against his visit......

Please Nick, don't you get into the little cocoon that politicians live in to divorce themselves from reality!

I think I see the difficulty in publishing my somewhat cryptic earlier comment.

So I'll expand, I agree with jitesh , and numerous others no doubt, in thinking that this approach to Syria, and the middle east does show notable comparisons to NI.

I however have a less optimistic viewpoint on the matter, the executive is close to failing because of one mans pride. While great strides forward have been made (and the 11th of July is my own new favourite day) we still have a very long way to go at home.

Perhaps the best thing we can do for the middle east is sort out our own loose ends properly before we mess with theirs.

Blair has said that he wished he had studied History at College.
Maybe if he had he would have noticed that any politician who fails in his policies in his own country resorts to trying to make his name in foreign affairs.
Ultimately they fail there as well.

Perhaps, Nick, you would explain why you think that the Syrian leaders reference to the suicide bombers as freedom fighters is so unreasonable. They are fighting against an occupation force and one that clearly bombs women and children without any remorse.

Isreal was created with no reference to the people whose land it is and no doubt its continued existence will form part of any future negotiations. And negotiations there must be.

As if it matters what Britain thinks or does, the USA is a law unto itself and the only law that counts.All that above Nick matters not it is just for the benefit of those who wish to feel a little bit better over there role in all this slaughter (as in we are trying to do something).Myself I am watching as the possession/control of the worlds dwindling energy resources progress it is only a matter of time before all this engulfs Saudi Arabia and the USA/UK Inc have to move in to take possession/control of it`s oil stocks as well to safeguard world supplies.If I didn`t know better I would think that had been the plan all along.Britain is like the hyena in that it follows the lion to see what scraps it can pick up.

Contrary to the barrage of denigration from the opposition media the PM is a very shrewd customer and has more staying power than all the opposition put together.
He may yet, pull what he wants out of the Iraq situation. Are the Tories beginning to fear that is the case?
Why did Qentin Davies,one of the Tory hierarchy, go out of his way to publicly decry the action of the Tory leader, David Cameron, in voting for an Iraq inquiry?
Anyone prepared to bet his/her reputation that the PM will not have some success?