During the long ten years that he was Prime Minister Blair enjoyed close, cordial, and cosy relations with both the Clinton and the Bush presidencies, in fact, the Clinton White House considered Blair the foreign leader closest to its boss. Regarding the relationship with the current US president, Blair is seen as a virtual soul mate. The extent of their bounding has been such that Blair chose to defy British public opinion to join the US in its invasion of Iraq -- an adventure that was to lead to the British electorate's disenchantment with him.

Yet, few can match Blair's smartness, intelligence, and articulation. He is also a powerfully persuasive interlocutor. Given his knowledge of and strong interest in the Middle East, as well as his personal relationship with the leaders of the region, Tony Blair would appear an ideal candidate for this exceedingly difficult task. In spite of that, Blair's appointment has been greeted with almost universal derision. What explains this rather grotesque phenomenon? For one, Blair is perceived as a person who never hesitated to abandon principles as a matter of expediency, or jettison inconvenient convictions to have an easy sail.

British politicians often sought to bask in the reflected glory of the power and majesty of the United States. Tony Blair was no exception and had been, on occasions, oblivious of the views of colleagues and party heavy weights. On the Iraq issue, he involved his government in lying and doctoring intelligence reports to strengthen the Bush administration's case against Saddam Hussein's WMD. It was so blatantly done that some of his cabinet colleagues were forced to quit.

The Arabs weren't a bunch of cretins who would not understand that it was to destroy the region's only potential challenge to Israel's domination of the region. How ironic that the Iraq fiasco, planned and executed, should prove to be Blair's final undoing. The Arab world certainly does not want to have him in their midst.

It is not surprising that few world leaders, with the exception of the Israelis and President Mahmud Abbas, had anything good to say about him. Russia is reported to have strongly opposed it while EU leaders have murmured that it was Bush's reward to his "poodle" for loyalty. Interestingly, the current EU president, the German foreign minister, was not even aware of the appointment until it was announced.

Also, a glance at the historical canvas of the region may be in order to understand why Blair is so much derided in the region, although as the leader of the region's major colonial power his role and expertise could be a valuable asset. But it is also worth delving into the way the same colonial power had an axe to grind in all vital Arab interests.

After all, it was Britain that had been the strongest supporter and financier of the Zionist movement. It was also Britain that was instrumental in the fulfillment of the looniest dream, the establishment of a Jewish commonwealth in Palestine. Britain's commitment in the form of the infamous Balfour declaration represented a major triumph for Zionist diplomacy.

When the declaration was issued, the Jewish population of Palestine numbered some 560,000 as against 600,000 Arabs. Yet, Israel came into being with strong British patronisation. It was in violation of an earlier British promise to Hussein, the Sharif of Makka, to support the establishment of an independent Arab kingdom after the war in return for an Arab revolt against the Ottoman empire. It was also against the provisions of the secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 to divide the Middle East into British and French spheres of influence in the event of an Allied victory.

These violations of the solemn promises continue to haunt the British to this day. Well known historian Tom Segev has pointed out in his book, "One Palestine, Complete," that: "Contrary to the widely held belief of Britain's pro-Arabism, British actions convincingly favoured the Zionist enterprise."

British foreign secretary Balfour was to later confess in his memories: "Zionism is right or wrong, good or bad, it is of a far profounder impact than the desires and prejudices of 700,000 Arabs who inhabit that ancient land."

That being the sentiment of the author of Balfour Declaration, the sentiments pouring out of Arab countries in their reaction is apt. As a matter of fact, more of meaningless rhetoric poured forth from Blair's lips as he arrived in the Middle East last month on his first visit after being named the Quartet's envoy. As is typical of all western diplomats when they speak about the Arab-Israeli conflict, the former British prime minister merely beat about the bush when he discovered "a moment of opportunity" and "a sense of possibility for"... for nothing.

Here is what the longest serving Labour prime minister had to say: "Whether that sense of possibility can be translated into something that needs to be worked at and thought about over time..." Brilliant diplomatese! What he simply couldn't alter was the truth -- that Israel should withdraw from the occupied territories so that a Palestinian state could come into being.

Instead, the brief Mr. Blair carries as a special envoy simplifies his job. He is only to obfuscate the Palestinian question with non-issues. The progress of sidetracking the real issue began in Arafat's time. One of the tricks for bypassing the real issue was to ask Arafat to have a prime minister and reform the Palestinian Authority (PA). He did both, but there was no progress on the question of Israel's withdrawal.

Now, again, Mr. Blair will concentrate on "institution building" at a time when the Palestinians themselves have gladdened their enemy's heart by fighting a civil war and turning West Bank and Gaza into two warring cantons.

Israel couldn't be happier. Clearly, it is futile to expect Blair or the Quartet to do anything substantive. President Abbas had his share of praise from the US and EU. The aid has started flowing in, but that is not going to take either him or his Palestinian people any closer to the goal of liberation of the Israeli occupied territories, and living in freedom and dignity in their areas. Meantime, Tony Blair can have his well-deserved vacation after ten years of premiership at home, if not any complex tour of diplomacy in the Middle East.

Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.