« India's reaction to a U.S. visa denial | Main | From Madrid: so close to London »

July 10, 2005

Bomb attacks in London : A tribute to Blair’s policy in Iraq.

by Pierre Langlais

Taking a look at some blogs on Newspapers sites give some indications about French’s reaction to 7/7 bomb attacks in London. On the website of L’Express, a weekly, one can find those very different points of view: First, this tough stance along the war of civilizations line:

“We have to bring war in Pakistan inside of the “tribal” zones, in Yemen, in Saudi Arabia. Anywhere islamism is not fought, we must fight. Our civilization is concerned. Our ancestors fought proudly during the crusades. We must follow their example.”

Then this call for unity: “We must stay all united again terrorism: American, British, French, European from all political borders.” And, this accusation:
“ Mr. Bush, thanks for this so peaceful world you built for us. You were right, the world is safer without Saddam Hussein. The truth is that your “surgical” actions created uncontrollable metastases like in London.”

Some media underline the importance of Tony Blair’s position on the war in Iraq. The friendship between the British prime minister and George W. Bush and the presence of British soldiers in Iraq are probably two major reasons why London was chosen by the terrorists, writes L’Humanité, a left wing newspaper who is one of the rare written media to take such a stance (radio columnists are more likely to do so).

“It’s impossible not to talk about Iraq. That seems to be the malediction of a prime minister who finally forgot about the war and followed George W. Bush’s quarrelsome position.”
Writes Bernard Duraud who concludes :
“The choice of London can be explained by the alliance between the United Kingdom and the USA and also by the support given by Blair’s government to Israel. In this context, the British secret services estimated that the British capital was a potential target for terrorists attacks. Iraq: a forgotten war ?”

Another daily, Le Figaro, is giving a balanced point of view, and try to separate the conflict about the war in Iraq and the war against terrorism.
Pierre Rousselin writes:
“On March 11, 2004, Al-Qaida had chosen Madrid and had come to its ends: three days later, José Maria Aznar, allied of George W. Bush, was beaten by José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero which repatriate the Spanish soldiers from Iraq. This time, the terrorists will not obtain such a result. The British public opinion can reproache Tony Blair for having misled her to engage the country in an unpopular war, the attacks will do nothing but reinforce his determination. The British soldiers will remain in Iraq. Nobody can doubt about it.
The explosion of violence in the heart of London had for effect to precipitate Tony Blair in the forefront of the antiterrorist fight. George W Bush itself changed his speech : he places his second mandate under the sign of the fight against tyranny in the world, rather than on his "crusade" against Ben Laden. It is necessary to go further and to find a true political solution in Baghdad, condition without which terrorism will never be overcome. It is an objective which everybody share, whatever the past dissentions on the war in Iraq. Tony Blair has the occasion to weigh on the debate. One must help him.”

Posted July 10, 2005 12:15 PM

Comments

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?