Last week, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the government would soon be introducing digital IDs for all British citizens. This move has drawn fierce criticism across the political spectrum. Even Reform U.K. leader Nigel Farage, whose every policy proposal is otherwise quickly adopted by Labour shortly after a token show of resistance, denounced the proposal as granting the state the power to “control and penalize” the public. He agreed, in effect, with former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was likewise opposed to the notion of making digital IDs compulsory, describing the proposed practice as “excessive state interference.”
Why did Starmer feel compelled to make such a self-sabotaging political move, then, knowing full well that he would face backlash from multiple political fronts, inadvertently “uniting the kingdom” against himself? Was it simply the irresistible influence of the "Big Tech"? One thing is for sure: Starmer’s “New Labour” has been a caricature of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s original project. Caricature in the sense that, although it seeks to follow Blair’s despicable legacy, its inauthenticity makes it far less appealing than the original. At least Tony Blair had the charm, as his sister-in-law Lauren Booth noted in a documentary. Perhaps this is why Blair’s ghost seems able to make Starmer’s decisions in his stead.
Those who do not pay close attention to British politics may have forgotten about Blair – at least until U.S. President Donald Trump recently mentioned him in his plan to recolonize Gaza after the end of the genocide, appointing one of the chief perpetrators of another brutal war in Iraq as the new viceroy. If you had no interest in following British politics, you would be forgiven for not wondering how Blair has been spending his time after all those years of disgrace. Nevertheless, it is useful to know that he has been primarily occupied with the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI), a “non-profit organization” specializing in Middle East policy and “terrorism.” More closely connected to the issue at hand, the TBI is also invested deeply in “exploring” how “new technologies can be implemented” in a “rapidly evolving” world, thereby devising strategies for innovations like digital IDs. And it must be for this reason that TBI’s biggest donor is none other than Oracle’s Larry Ellison, one of the wealthiest “tech entrepreneurs.”
Ellison’s charitable efforts extend beyond the TBI. He is also the single biggest individual donor to the misnamed Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), devoting the largest part of his philanthropic efforts to “the Jewish state.” Not too long ago, his son, David Ellison, was tasked with acquiring Paramount and its subsidiary, CBS. This was followed by the father of Ellison’s acquisition of TikTok’s U.S. operations. Both developments have been acknowledged and welcomed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself.
This engagement might explain why Blair, after all these years, has decided to reappear in public, or why he was summoned by those who make the big decisions. In 2003, in his address to the Iraqi people, Blair had promised that British forces were “friends and liberators of the Iraqi people, not their conquerors.” Will Blair now say to the people of Gaza that his colonial rule in Gaza will “liberate” them, that his forces will never really “conquer” Gaza? And, in fact, why is Blair willing to insert himself into this ordeal, abandoning a comfortable and relatively uneventful life? Is he choosing the “profitable” over the comfortable again?
A few years ago, former U.S. National Intelligence Officer Elizabeth Murray recounted that Blair was called “George Bush’s poodle” in their community. Following in his hero’s footsteps, is Starmer now trying to be Trump’s? Or is it simply Blair himself behind the scenes, trying to prove himself worthy of the reward that colonial governorship could bring him?
