Back in January so caled peace envoy Tony Blair has given his firm backing to the Egyptian government and called for the international community to get behind the leadership in the country, after a meeting on Wednesday with military chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
During an interview with Sky News Arabia, Mr Blair, who had previously given his backing to Hosni Mubarak, accused the Muslim Brotherhood of "taking the country away from its basic values of hope and progress".
He also gave his support to the actions of the military, who helped to depose Mohamed Morsi last July, saying they had acted "at the will of the people"
As opposed to a democratic election that is.
We may not like the Muslim Brotherhood but did the West do anything to help them in the transformation from opposition to Government ?
It seems for Tony Blair democracy only works if the "right people" are elected .
Blair wrote in the Observer last year
I am a strong supporter of democracy. But democratic government doesn't on its own mean effective government. Today, efficacy is the challenge. When governments don't deliver, people protest. They don't want to wait for an election. In fact, as Turkey and Brazil show, they can protest even when, on any objective basis, countries have made huge progress. But as countries move from low to middle income status, the people's expectations rise. They want quality services, better housing, good infrastructure, especially transport. And they will fight against any sense that a clique at the top is barring their way.
This is a sort of free democratic spirit that operates outside the convention of democracy that elections decide the government. It is enormously fuelled by social media, itself a revolutionary phenomenon. And it moves very fast in precipitating crisis. It is not always consistent or rational. A protest is not a policy, or a placard a programme for government. But if governments don't have a clear argument with which to rebut the protest, they're in trouble.
In Egypt, the government's problems were compounded by resentment at the ideology and intolerance of the Muslim Brotherhood. People felt that the Brotherhood was steadily imposing its own doctrines on everyday life. Across the Middle East, for the first time, and this is a positive development, there is open debate about the role of religion in politics. Despite the Muslim Brotherhood's superior organisation, there is probably a majority for an intrinsically secular approach to government in the region.
Now Tony Blair has agreed to advise the Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who came to power in a military coup last year, as part of a programme funded by the United Arab Emirates that has promised to deliver huge "business opportunities" to those involved,
So maybe that's his motivation rather than democratic institutions. , it is often unclear where his envoy role ends and his business interests begin. Or which he sees as a priority
So Egypt has a former Military Leader under el-Sisi in exactly the same way it was under Mubarack.
Blair who has much to answer for his intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq clearly believes that he knows whats best for the Middle East.
But as the Arab Spring turns to Winter as the result of Tony Blair's actions Islamic Fundamentalism is on the rise we must surly ask is this Man really suitable as a peace envoy?