Why was Tony Blair being paid by the UAE while working as Middle East envoy?

It’s indisputable that his globetrotting role trying to solve the Israel-Palestinian crisis put him at many tables with world leaders with whom he could do business with

Tony Blair has questions to answer over his job as Middle East envoy (Getty)

There are two ways of looking at the latest revelations that Tony Blair was being paid millions by the United Arab Emirates while also working as Middle East envoy.

If you’re being kind to our former prime minister you might accept his assurances that there was no conflict of interest. You might accept that he didn't let any relationship with the Gulf state affect his important work trying to solve the Israel-Palestinian conflict.

For the sake of argument let’s accept that – though many won’t due to the intense hatred of Iran in the region landing the UAE fair and square on the side of Israel.

But what I am finding hard to accept is the assertion that Blair didn't use the role as Quartet envoy to further his business interests.

It’s indisputable that his globetrotting role trying to solve the Israel-Palestinian crisis put him at many tables with world leaders with whom he could do business with.

So, according to this week’s story, it’s known that Blair frequently met the UAE foreign minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan in his role as peace envoy.

But at the same time he was also being paid by a Korean oil company seeking to do business with the UAE-owned International Petroleum Investment Company.

Leaked emails speak of how “very grateful” Blair was that Sheikh Abdullah was able to get the two sides together and arrange meetings. No doubt the Korean oil company concerned, UI Energy, felt its large payments to Blair for his help setting things up was money well spent.

The main thrust of the story, however, is how Blair’s office, and Blair himself, received millions in consultancy fees from the UAE.

There are also are claims that Foreign Office officials given to Blair to help him with his peace envoy role were diverted to work on his business projects.

One travelled to the UAE for a meeting with the head of the country’s sovereign wealth fund in Abu Dhabi, Khaldoon Al Mubarak. A year later Blair was hired to do paid advisory work for them.

Four years later, in 2013, our former PM was having talks with the British government, on behalf of the UAE, when it was trying to secure deals in the UK worth hundreds of millions of pounds.

The justification for these very large financial windfalls is that Blair was not being paid for his envoy role and needed to find money from somewhere to pay for the large travel expenses he and his office were running up.

That’s a lot of flights and hotel expenditure when you consider that as well as the millions he got from the sovereign wealth fund, there was £1.2m from Sheikh Abdullah’s office in 2011 and £8m for the UAE foreign ministry for work in Colombia, Vietnam and Mongolia.

What about consultancy roles in other countries which we haven’t been told about? We only know about the UAE handouts because of leaked emails seen by the Daily Telegraph.

Should any further arrangements not be publicly declared in much the same way as an MP has to reveal what he or she is paid in the Register for Members’ Financial Interests?

Chris Doyle, of the Council for Arab-British Understanding, said: “If you look at the seven principles of public life – selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership – it is hard to make a case that Tony Blair adhered to any of these while serving as Quartet envoy”.

The other player in this saga who doesn't come out too well is the United Arab Emirates – lining the envoy’s pockets to pursue its own geopolitical and commercial goals, when perhaps it should have left him to concentrate on the job in hand.

Is it any wonder that Blair’s eight-year tenure as Quartet envoy is largely seen as ineffectual when so much else was going on?

Anthony Harwood is a former foreign editor of the Daily Mail