1 Boring Old Man

Blair recalled to face further questions on build-up to Iraq war
The Independent UK
By Nigel Morris
9 December 2010

Tony Blair is to be recalled before the Iraq Inquiry to answer questions over whether he pressured his Attorney General to change his advice on the legality of the war. The former prime minister will face a second session before the Chilcot inquiry in the new year – a year after he refused to express regrets over leading Britain to war in 2003. His statement provoked fury in the hearing, with members of the audience calling him a "liar" and a "murderer". The decision to summon him back will be a blow to Mr Blair, who had hoped his previous six-hour appearance would defuse the continuing controversy over the war.

But it is evidence that the Chilcot team believes there are still significant gaps to be filled as they try to piece together a full picture of the build-up to war. They are preparing to question him over suggestions that he put pressure on Lord Goldsmith, who was then the Attorney General, to alter his advice on the legality of the war. The lawyer’s change of heart just before the planned invasion gave a green light for British troops to join the US-led military action.

Mr Blair has denied attempting to influence Lord Goldsmith, but previously classified papers showed he queried the Attorney General’s previous view that invasion without a new United Nations resolution would be illegal. He is also likely to face fresh cross-examination over the commitments he gave to President George Bush that Britain would back an invasion, as well as questions on weapons of mass destruction and whether he allowed proper debate in the Cabinet on the war.

Lord Goldsmith has been asked to provide further written evidence to the inquiry, which will hold its new round of public hearings in January and February. Other witnesses who have been called back include Jack Straw, who was then Foreign Secretary, and the current Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell…

The British at least seem to be willing to face the beast and look into how it all happened. It seems pretty simple, really. After 9/11, there was great energy to "do something." Our leaders already has a lot of energy focused on the Middle East and her oil fields. So the American government of the time hatched a scheme to invade Iraq, and the British jumped on board. The deceit used to justify that invasion is a matter of public record, still ignored. In the UK, they seem willing to stop ignoring it.

Tony Blair, England’s Prime Minister at the time, was a force to keep our Administration on something of the straight and narrow, convincing Bush to go to the U.N., but in return, he swore allegiance to the cause. He denies that he did that, but most evidence says he did. He was forced to work through the Attorney General, Lord Peter Goldsmith, who finally declared that the invasion might possibly kind of sort of been something in the vicinity of maybe legal at the twelfth hour. Blair claimed not to have pressured Lord Goldsmith. Very few believe him on that point. I sure don’t.

So the Chilcot Inquirers have summoned him for a second round. There are letters, still classified, between Blair and Bush during the period leading up to the war – reported to be "scurrilous." In the recent Wikileaks documents, there are reports that the UK had taken steps to protect the U.S. interests in the Chilcot Inquiry, so there’s a lot of pressure for the Inquiry to prove that it’s not a whitewash. Many think that a way to do that would be to release these "scurrilous" letters. Sounds good to me.