Trump thinks Tony Blair is the man to bring peace to Gaza. I’m not so sure

As President Trump boarded the plane to travel to the Middle East for his Gaza peace summit this week, he stuck his head out of the plane window and told a gaggle of journalists that he would be looking to find out how popular Tony Blair was in the region before deciding on whether to appoint him to his new Board of Peace.

“I just don’t know that,” he said, rowing back on reports that Blair was a shoo-in for the top job. “I like Tony, I have always liked Tony. But I want to find out that he is an acceptable choice to everybody.”

The answer he gets will not be clear cut.

Few UK prime or foreign ministers have demonstrated such ability to interact and influence Arab leaders in modern times. Remarkably, Blair’s majlis interactions continue almost 20 years after he left Downing Street.

As a UK ambassador in the Gulf, I was impressed that despite his personal unpopularity in the Arab street, and despite having little Arabic language skills, Blair reinvented himself as an influential adviser to Arab leaders. He was at ease in the opulent environments of the rulers’ palaces in Doha, Riyadh or Abu Dhabi. Blair even managed to stay close to Gulf leaders at times when they were publicly at odds with each other, for example during the Gulf Cooperation Council’s blockade and isolation of their cousins in Qatar.

In such elite circles, Blair is seen as a power broker, with the US and Israeli leadership on speed dial. That is why Arab leaders – and others – want his advice. According to those who know, his ability to navigate Israeli politics is virtually unparalleled among Western leaders. That could prove vital for the success of Trump’s peace plan in the coming months.

Yet, while the international credentials and ability to work the top table are indisputable, at a popular level Blair’s legacy remains toxic in the region. Even within a country such as Israel – where Blair is seen as close to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the pair having worked together as political leaders since the Nineties – views on a role for Blair overseeing Gaza’s reconstruction are mixed.

Palestinians in particular feel uncomfortable about any new leadership role for Blair. They remember him – whether fairly or not – as the former Quartet envoy, representing the international community, who failed to improve their situation, make progress towards a sovereign Palestinian state or give sufficient priority to freedom of movement and equal rights for Palestinians.

While, of course, Trump’s plan excludes Hamas from any role in Gaza’s governance, Hamas themselves have made clear their outright opposition to Blair. That is not surprising given that he refused to recognise their 2006 electoral victory – something that Blair appeared to acknowledge as a mistake in 2017 when suggesting it might have been better to engage Hamas in dialogue. So, if Trump consults normal people in the region – which is perhaps unlikely – about Blair’s suitability to oversee Gaza’s reconstruction, he is unlikely to get the answer he is looking for.

Blair himself has – at least according to one close adviser of many year – never suffered from an excess of self-awareness. He certainly has thick skin after a lifetime in politics. Both qualities would help in such an exposed leadership role. Blair to his credit has shown unusual courage in showing willing to take on a thankless task where the risk of failure is high. Given his personal history, he may see it as unfinished business, or even a possible path to redemption.

The ability to reinvent himself, and his chameleon-like quality to fit in and build a useful personal relationship with virtually anyone, anywhere, has allowed Blair to retain his place at the top table. It should not come as a surprise that he has emerged publicly as a contributor and potential leader for Trump's Gaza peace plan. He appeared to be consulted and trusted by the presidential inner circle this summer when they were considering how to effect a ceasefire, secure the release of the hostages and move towards a sustainable regional peace.

His playbook with the powerful is also legendary. I watched in European Council meetings, soon after he became prime minister, as he wooed President Chirac of France, who was deeply sceptical about the UK’s approach to the European project, was on the other side of the political divide, and old enough to be his father. Blair encouraged Chirac to take a close interest and evident delight in the new Downing Street baby, Leo Blair, born in 2000, and played to Chirac’s lifelong interest in Asia by entertaining the president at top Japanese restaurants in London. Often it seemed more a case of Blair personally being at the centre of European discussions, rather than the UK.

What I can say is that I was always struck by how Blair engaged his interlocutors seemingly regardless of political and other major differences. In many ways, he demonstrated polished diplomatic rather than political skills. His trick was to build a personal relationship and leverage that into the public sphere. He is a diplomat’s diplomat at head-of-government level – and, right now, that is an asset.

Whether Trump decides to push ahead in nominating Blair – either as some sort of neo-colonialist governor general for Gaza or in a supporting role on his putative so-called “Board of Peace” – will probably depend on how he thinks it will play in the region and the answers he gets to the question he shared with journalists on Air Force One. It will not be enough that a handful of onside Gulf rulers, autocrats and a politically vulnerable Israeli prime minister think that Blair might well suit their various agendas. That said, Trump is hardly spoilt for choice in terms of respected statesmen he trusts, who might command confidence among the protagonists and people of the Middle East.

Nicholas Hopton served as the British ambassador to Libya (2019-21), Iran (2015-18), Qatar (2013-15) and Yemen (2012-13). He is a distinguished senior fellow at RUSI