I thought he did a very nice job with this.  However, as usual, I have to quibble just a little.  Could it be that before Blair Britain never had  "liberal interventionism"?  I  know that in the US, that is what  has been going on for the better part of a century, from Woodrow Wilson to Franklin Roosevelt, to the liberal  dogooders that founded and ran the early CIA (David Atlee Phillips, Miles Copeland, etc etc) The Kennedys...  generally the conservatives have  (at least rhetorically) have been isolationist, and the liberals have been eager to  bring democracy to the world, while bringing oil, bananas, garments, consumer goods of every type  to the US.  If the slave laborers who made these things couldn't understand how lucky they were that they had democracy courtesy the USA - well, screw em. 
At any rate, a good article from a musician who can talk about current affairs without embarrassing himself.  That's how it is with us, I say good on him, he can join our club. 
http://counterpunch.org/eno10092007.html
 
October       9, 2007
        Exporting Democracy       with Missiles
        When       Governments Thrive on a State of War
        By BRIAN ENO
        Speech at the "Illegal"       Troops Out demo, Trafalgar Square, London on Monday 8 October       2007.
        Simon Jenkins from the Guardian wrote
                 "Amid the past week's         political sound and fury, one subject slid unnoticed under the         platform. Britain is at war. Its soldiers are fighting and dying         in two distant lands. Foreign policy, once the stuff of national         debate, is consigned to cliché and platitude.
         With casualties mounting in         Iraq and Afghanistan, politicians dare not mention it, let alone         disagree. The prime minister declared to his party conference         in Bournemouth that "the message should go out to anyone         facing persecution anywhere from Burma to Zimbabwe . . . we will         not rest". Britain will defend the oppressed anywhere in         the world. Unfortunately Britain is doing nothing in Burma or         Zimbabwe, while the message from Iraq and Afghanistan is that         Britain chooses bad wars at America's behest in which it gets         beaten.
         All the airbrushing in the         world will not remove the greatest legacy that Tony Blair left         his successors, that of "liberal interventionism".         Never articulated except in a confused speech in Chicago in 1999,         it asserted Britain's right to meddle in any country to which         it took offence, under the rubric of "humanitarian just         war."
        Now Simon Jenkins isn't a crazy       leftist firebrand--I'm not even sure what part of the political       spectrum he occupies, but it probably isn't the same as mine.       However, I trust his intellectual honesty in a way that I can       no longer trust the honesty of most of our government. 
       There are, however, a few clear-sighted people in Parliament.       I'd like now to read something that Ming Campbell recently wrote--which       as far as I know went virtually unreported outside of the Yorkshire       Post, where it was published:
        He said:
                 "Britain's  right wing         press, politicians and commentators have an unshakeable habit         of working themselves into a fury about power-sharing in Europe.         They see themselves as the great defenders of British sovereignty,         against the political ambitions of our continental partners.
         Yet those same people remain         largely silent over the transfer of British sovereignty in crucial         areas of national security to The United States.
         In a three-paragraph written         statement slipped out in July, just one day before Parliament         rose--and almost completely unnoticed by the press--the Defence         Secretary announced that the Government is permitting the US         administration to install additional equipment at Menwith Hill,         in Yorkshire, to support its unproven missile defence system.
         There has been no public debate         in Britain about the desirability or workability of missile defence,         let alone about the strategic assumptions that underpin it. 
         .. The political will to persevere         with it has been driven as much by industrial as military priorities.         Its original justification was to defend against China: now it         is said that it will protect against Iran, depicted in Washington         as an implacable, long-term enemy."
        What this says to me is that       the current American government--and ours, for as long as we       follow them - thrives on a state of war. They need it because       it allows them to carry on with business as usual whilst at the       same time suppressing dissent 'for security reasons'. It allows       them to sidestep the democratic process by maintaining a continuous       state of emergency.
        For the sake of our country,       and Iraq - as well as for the sake of all those who in the future       are going to be cast as 'our enemies', we must get off this war-mongering       treadmill. Our government talks about our 'special relationship'       with America, but we should be asking how special that really       is. And I think we should be looking at another relationship       we have that seems to me much more special: that with Europe.       If we'd followed the European line rather than the American,       it's likely not only that we wouldn't have been part of this       stupid invasion, but that it wouldn't have happened at all. Our       cooperation was what gave the Americans the figleaf to cover       the dirty little secret that this was an invasion carried out       for their benefit alone. Our complicity made it look acceptably       international.
        In the last couple of weeks       several people at the BBC have resigned because someone called       a cat Socks instead of Cookie, and because the Queen was wrongly       depicted as being in a huff. At the same time we are waging and       losing a pointless war that has killed perhaps as many as one       million people. Will there ever be any resignations over that?       
        We have a serious problem on       our hands. We have a government that was elected by 22% of the       eligible voters, but somehow gained 55% of the seats in Parliament.       We have been conned into an illegal invasion by shameless propaganda       and media manipulation. We have a foreign policy in place that       is hugely unpopular, but which continues nonetheless. We have       risen to third place in the rankings of arms-exporting countries.       And here we are today at a demonstration that has been declared       illegal. 
        Is this what we mean by democracy       when we so proudly export it--in missile form--to other countries?       
        Brian Eno is a musician.