Chilcot's Blair Damb Squib

Well what exactly did we learn from Tony Blair's appearance before the Chilcot inquiry yesterday.

Pretty much nothing, as Jackie Ashley writes in today's Guardian:

"the inquiry members had failed to nail him on the central issue of their quest – why had he taken the country to war when the Attorney General's advice had been lukewarm at least, on the legality of such action?"

So what was the point?

Blair even tried to turn on to the offensive asking where Saddam would be in 2010 if he hadn't taken action. Well a decade on from the first Gulf War we saw exactly what a decade of sanctions against arm deals to Iraq had left him. Jonathan Freeland puts it like this:

"To which the answer is surely that the 2003 invasion exposed Saddam and his ragtag army as a toothless tiger, whose rusting arsenal would be even more useless seven years on than it was then."

The former Prime Minister:

• gave no substantial ground over why he sent 40,000 UK troops to war to disarm Saddam of weapons he did not possess
• blamed blamed 'the very near failure of the Iraqi occupation' on Iranian interference
• arguing that if the west had backed off Saddam would have reassembled the invisible WMDs

As for regrets. He had none saying as his parting statement:

"Responsibility – but not a regret for removing Saddam Hussein. I think he was a monster."

This led to the jeers and calls of 'murderer' and 'liar' from the public gallery.

But then did we expect anything else key questions were left out from Jack Straw and Lord Goldsmith's questioning. There was the lack of the Paxman punch to get any answers to the tough questions. The real answers that needed to be got at were left out, there wasn't that sense of digging any deeper. Fern Britton proved to be a tougher, if shorter, inquisitor of Blair than Chilcot.

War! Iraq! What is it Good For?

1980s

Frankie Says
War!
What is it Good For?

1990s

John Says
To return sovereignty to Kuwait
From illegal occupation

2000s

Tony Says
To stop WMD getting here
In 45 Minutes

2010s

Tony Says
Well, err, actually what I meant to say.
Was, well, you know.
It was to stop Saddam
Building those WMDs.
Err.
Yes the ones I said he'd had
Ready to fire in 45 minutes.

A Secret Plan My Lord?

Baldrick: You had a cunning plan my Lord?

Lord Straw: Yes Baldrick, one so mind numbingly cunning and secret that I didn't mention it on 18th March 2003 when we debated the issue, nor mentioned to cabinet. But at some future point in my defence will produce it in an 8,000 word memorandum.

Baldrick: But what about Cook?

Lord Straw: What's Mrs Miggins got to do with this?

Baldrick: Not Mrs Miggins, my Lord, but Robert Finlayson Cook.

Lord Straw: Ah well the red, beard, Robin, went bob, bob, bobbin' along.

So Jack Straw had a secret plan to keep us out of the war on Iraq, or at least it was secret until yesterday.

Of course his predecessor as Foreign Secretary Robin Cook had a far more open plan to keep us out of the Iraq War. He announced his resignation as Leader of the Commons the evening before the vote on sending troops and then voting against the Government. Straw of course trooped through the Government lobbies. Like Cook Straw claims to have had disagreements with Tony Blair.

So what was the secret plan? Well apparently it was to offer support to the US-led invasion but not to send troops. Of course reading Robin Cook's memoires you know that he made his feelings known in Cabinet, there was no mention of Straw doing the same. Indeed in response to just that question yesterday he responded:

"Was there a cabinet or a cabinet committee at which my alternative to the prime minister was discussed? The answer to that is no."

So therefore his cabinet colleagues did not know that there was an alternative, (forgive my scepticism) if there was one, from the Foreign Secretary, even though his predecessor was expressing concerns.

However, compare such aspirations with what he said in the chamber on the evening of the 18 March, 2003;

"My hon. Friend has many arguments against military action, and I respect her for them. ..... I know that if we fail to take action in the face of an obvious evil and an unresolved problem, the costs not only to the international community but, over time, to this country and the rest of the world will be calculable and high."

So there appeared to be no concerns about regime change being an issue, there was an 'obvious evil and unresolved problem'. Was that alluding to the First Gulf War when regime change wasn't carried out?

How staunchly was he for sending troops into Iraq, well also in that debate he said:

"Like my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and many others, I have worked for months for a peaceful resolution of the crisis. However, I am as certain as I can that the Government's course of action is right."

And later

"The fact is this: Saddam will not disarm peacefully. We can take 12 more days, 12 more weeks, or 12 more years, but he will not disarm. We have no need to stare into the crystal ball for this. We know it from the book—from his record. So we are faced with a choice. Either we leave Saddam where he is, armed and emboldened, an even bigger threat to his country, his region and international peace and security, or we disarm him by force."

and to conclude

"Our forces will almost certainly be involved in military action. Some may be killed; so, too, will innocent Iraqi civilians, but far fewer Iraqis in the future will be maimed, tortured or killed by the Saddam regime. The Iraqi people will begin to enjoy the freedom and prosperity that should be theirs. The world will become a safer place, and, above all, the essential authority of the United Nations will have been upheld. I urge the House to vote with the Government tonight."

I clearly am missing something here as for the Iraqi people to 'begin to enjoy the freedom and prosperity that should be theirs' surely suggests the regime change that yesterday he said he had arguments with the Prime Minister about. That was the tenant of his closing remarks as he dispatched the Government's troops into the Aye lobby.