i was never a particularly huge fan of tony blair's. i know a lot of people who were high on him early on, because he was shaking up the crusty old labour party in the united kingdom, but mostly because he was actually making it possible for them to get elected again. myself, i'm a little suspicious of any change that is based primarily on making yourself more palatable to the masses, but i guess that's why i'm writing this blog and not running a country.

but even blair's most die hard fans, and i'm assuming they still exist, would have to wince at his desperation to be named the new middle east envoy. myself, i can't even fathom why he would want the job, but it seems to me like someone might not want to stray to far from the spotlight (whether that's because he likes the attention or because he's plotting a comeback is anyone's guess).

now that his good (only?) friend george w. bush has strong-armed him into the position, the rest of the world can sit back and feel nauseated at the pure cynicism it represents.

blair replaces former world bank president james wolfensohn, who, no matter what you might think of him, could at least claim to have a modicum of respect from all parties in the region. blair, being one of the leaders responsible for the invasion of iraq, can have no hope of claiming respect or even credibility when dealing with key players in the middle east. appointing him seems to be nothing short of an acknowledgment that the task of diplomacy in the middle east is seen as a lost cause and there is no plan to put a serious effort into it.

chalk up another victory for the politics of hope.