The peoples of the world are more or less united, and at the very least divided. With the exceptions of the US, UK and Spanish leaders, a world majority feels that there is not yet a case for war.
Millions protest in the streets, cabinet ministers resign in the face of their electorate’s overwhelming view that although there is a real case to answer, the case is not proven.
Everyone agrees that whilst there is a threat, actually there is no new threat here since 1991, and, crucially, that there is no link whatsoever demonstrated between Iraq and 9/11.
The French government stand resolutely behind this view, thereby at the very least reflecting a major strand of world opinion, and, what is more, a majority of views in the UK and Spain, and perhaps even in some circles of the US.
The US, UK and Spanish leaderships divert attention from their own breathtakingly reckless arrogance by attaching shameful blame for a failure of diplomacy on… France.
Across the world, people are supposed suddenly to find agreement in their united disdain of the French. They were, after all, just reflecting the majority view. And they are… French. We do not approve of this war, but actually we should hate the French more. Puts all the progress we have made here towards peace on this continent back at least 20 years.
You state that you ‘will do what is right’ by ignoring the UN if nations vote ‘unreasonably’. Just wondering, in a free world, what kind of a pretext for military action is that, exactly ? And what is democracy worth if you can ignore the majority, and claim that dissenting votes are ‘unreasonable’ ?
148. Farewell to Tony Blair
15. Sorrowful hills – the Space Shuttle Disaster and war clouds in Iraq
86. Running in the election battlegrounds
71. How the West Was Won – Iraq implodes
46. On the front line – Crawley’s echoes of Madrid
95. Going underground – the 7/7 attacks on London