Tony Blair Becomes Middle East Envoy

Today's New York Times had an excellent editorial on Tony Blair's appointment as Envoy to the Middle East and the steps that the Bush administration must take to ensure Blair's success:

Let Blair Be Blair

It is already clear what Tony Blair's first challenge will be in his new job as international envoy to the Middle East. Unless he stands up to the White House and insists that his responsibilities include peacemaking - not just fund -raising and "institution building" for the embattled Palestinian party Fatah, as the Americans insist - he will quickly be marginalized. You don't send a Tony Blair into a raging conflagration to stand on the sidelines and distribute charity.

The Palestinians desperately need economic development and better institutions. But these goals cannot be realistically separated from the larger challenge of restoring their belief in a livable future in a viable Palestinian state. The job of peace envoy is extremely challenging, requiring a leader of Mr. Blair's prominence and skills. The job of everything-but-peace-envoy is a cynical waste.

That was the unfortunate experience of the previous envoy, James Wolfensohn, the former World Bank president. Few people know more about fund-raising and institution building than him. But he couldn't make progress in the face of an immobilized peace process, an imminent Palestinian civil war and an American president and secretary of state who wouldn't deeply engage in peacemaking and refused to let anyone else try.

Mr. Blair's greatest talent is his ability to persuade, shame and
wheedle people into doing things they would just as soon not do. He should be
allowed to use it.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, to whom the White House now expects Mr. Blair to defer, regularly travels to the region but has repeatedly declined to put American influence to any constructive use. She has yet to propose a Rice plan and challenge those leaders to accept it. Nor has she pressed Israel's politically wounded prime minister, Ehud Olmert, to take the
necessary steps he feels too weak to take on his own, like a full settlement freeze.

Mr. Blair might not have been the ideal choice for this job. But he
brings real international stature and, we would think, a large claim on support
from President Bush, with whom he stuck loyally in Iraq at a huge cost to his
domestic standing and political legacy. As British prime minister, Mr. Blair
felt a need to swallow his pride and go along in silence. If he means to be
useful in the Middle East, he now needs to push back and make clear that the
role of a peace envoy is to negotiate peace.