Iraq
Chilcot Inquiry: Complete Whitewash of the “Tony Blair Regime”?
By Felicity Arbuthnot
August 18, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "GR"
- Bereaved UK
families who lost sons and daughters in the illegal invasion of Iraq
have now threatened legal action against Sir John Chilcot who headed
the near two year long, £10m Iraq Inquiry (30th July 2009
– 2nd February 2011) if a date for release of Inquiry
findings is not announced publicly within two weeks. Further,
suspicions over the reason for the approaching five years near
silence from Sir John are raised by a detailed investigation by
journalist Andrew Pierce.
Writing in the Daily Mail (1) he highlights the
seemingly close relationship between Sir John Chilcot and Tony
Blair.
Pierce refers to Blair’s first appearance before
the Inquiry five years ago when: “the Chairman, Sir John Chilcot
treated him with almost painful deference.” What few realized was
that Sir John, a former career civil servant: “could, in fact, have
greeted Blair as an old friend.”
They first met in 1997 when Blair was still Leader
of the Opposition, at the discreet Travellers Club in Central
London, founded in 1819 as: “A meeting place for gentlemen who had
travelled abroad, their visitors and (for) diplomats posted in
London.” It continues to host: “distinguished members of the
Diplomatic Service, the Home Civil Service …”
The meeting took place just months before Blair
became Prime Minister. “John Chilcot, at the time, was the most
senior civil servant at the Northern Ireland Office … Civil servants
often meet Opposition politicians for briefings (prior to) elections
but they are usually held in Whitehall Departments where (official)
minutes are taken.” A meeting at the ultra discreet Club ensured “it
was not made public.”
On becoming Prime Minister (2nd May
1997) Tony Blair: “worked closely with Chilcot on the Northern
Ireland peace process.”
On Chilcot’s retirement he was: “knighted by a
grateful Blair … in to the fourth most senior order of British
chivalry.”
However, points out Andrew Pierce, Sir John never
really left Whitehall, undertaking numbers of roles on public
committees: “often at the behest of the Blair administration.”
Moreover, in 2004 Lord Butler was charged with
convening an Inquiry: “into the role of the (UK) intelligence
services in the Iraq war. Blair chose the Members of the Inquiry’s
five strong Committee.”
Foxes guarding hen houses cannot fail to come to
mind: “ Surprise, surprise, Chilcot was one of the first asked to
serve on it …”
Unexpectedly however, the Butler Review as it was
named: “Provided devastating evidence that (Blair’s) Downing Street,
with collusion of intelligence chiefs ‘sexed up’ the threat” from
Saddam Hussein”, yet: “concluded that no one should be held
responsible.”
“In short, it let Blair off the hook.”
When Blair’s successor as Prime Minister, Gordon
Brown – former Chancellor of the Exchequer who wrote the £mega
million cheques for the illegal invasion, thus also part of the
crime of enormity – established the Chilcot Inquiry in 2009, it was
originally to be held “behind closed doors.” Uproar from opposition
MPs, from senior military figures and the public forced it in to the
open.
However Philippe Sands, QC., Professor of
International Law at University College, London and barrister with
Matrix Chambers, a legal firm established, ironically, by Tony
Blair’s barrister wife Cherie, quickly questioned the suitability of
Sir John to lead the new Inquiry.
Sands questioned what it was in his: “role in the
Butler Inquiry that caused the Prime Minister to conclude he was
suitable?” He cited a first hand observer who had described
Chilcot’s: “obvious deference to governmental authority”, a view he
had: “heard repeated several times. More troubling is evidence I
have seen for myself.”
He was also dismissive of Sir John’s questioning
of Law Lord, Lord Goldsmith, the former Attorney General, who had
ruled that the Iraq invasion would be illegal – only to change his
mind when Blair wrote on the top left hand side of the page: “I
really do not understand this.”
Professor Sands – author of “Lawless World” in
which he accuses former President George W. Bush and Tony Blair of
conspiring to Invade Iraq in violation of international law – also
cited: “Sir John’s spoon-fed questions” to the former Attorney
General: “designed to elicit a response” demonstrating: “the
reasonableness of his actions and those of the government.”
In context, in “Lawless World” Sands cites a five
page long “extremely sensitive” memo (2) relating to a meeting
between George W. Bush and Tony Blair at the White House on 31st
January 2003. The memo was written by David Manning, Blair’s Chief
Foreign Policy Advisor at the time, who was also present.
Content included Bush mooting the idea of painting
a U-2 spy-plane in UN colours and flying it low over Iraq in the
hope of Iraq reacting by shooting it down, providing a pretext for
the US and UK to attack and invade.
It also confirms Bush and Blair agreeing to invade
regardless of whether weapons of mass destruction were found by the
UN weapons inspectors. This contradicts Blair’s statement to
Parliament after his return that Iraq would be given a final chance
to disarm.
Giving a further lie to Blair’s Parliamentary
assurances, Bush is paraphrased as saying: “The start date for the
military campaign was now pencilled in for 10th March.
This was when the bombing would begin.” (See also 3.)
In an opinion which should surely be George W.
Bush’s epitaph he told Blair he: “thought it unlikely there would be
internecine warfare between different religious and ethnic groups”
after the invasion.
In spite of the erased and ruined lives in
millions, the ruins of Iraq, of much of Baghdad “the Paris of the 9th
century”, of many of historical gems that have survived assaults
over millennia but not Bush and Blair, it seems likely Chilcot’s
Inquiry, if it eventually appears, will prove another dead end.
As Sir Christopher Meyer, former UK Ambassador to
Washington pointed out: “When Downing Street set up the Inquiry in
to ‘phone hacking (by) newspapers, it was a Judicial Inquiry, led by
a Judge (with) powers to compel witnesses to answer all questions
put to them. Chilcot does not have that power. A Judge should be
running this Inquiry, not a retired civil servant.”
Prime Minister David Cameron has paid lip service
to exasperation, but as commented on before in these columns,
regards Blair as a “mentor” and in opposition aspired to be “heir to
Blair.” He has also refused Sir John correspondence between Bush and
Blair (held in government archives) which Sir John has been reported
as regarding as essential to his findings. Current speculations are,
unless the families of the bereaved win out, is that the world will
see nothing until late 2016.
Another reason for the inordinate delay is the
decision of the Inquiry to write to every witness criticized in
order to allow them to respond. How very cosy. Imagine that in a
Court of Law.
However, if any of the above has you wondering,
there is far worse to come.
According to a recent report (4) although: “as
many as one hundred and fifty (government) Ministers, civil servants
and senior military figures have been sent details of criticism,
including draft pages of the Report”, due to the structure of the
Inquiry: “Ministers and officials accused of wrongdoing in (the)
Chilcot Inquiry will never be named.”
Indeed: “One former Labour Minister is now said
to be going through hundreds of pages of the report ‘with a fine
toothcomb’. The ex-Minister has also been offered free legal advice
from the Government.”
A £ ten million stitch-up?
Reg Keys, speaking for one of the bereaved UK
families threatening action against Sir John Chilcot’s team, who ran
as an against Tony Blair in his Durham constituency of Sedgefield as
an Independent Parliamentary candidate in 2005, and whose son, Lance
Corporal Tom Keys was killed in Iraq in 2003 has had enough. Tony
Blair: “should be dragged in shackles to a War Crimes Court” he says
(5.)
In a memorable speech (6) on the 2005 election
night, Blair and his wife standing with frozen faces, as Keys vowed:
“I’ll hold Blair to account.” Unlike Blair, Reg Keys speaks the
truth.
Notes
1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3198799/The-cosy-friendship-inquiry-chief-Tony-Blair.html
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush–Blair_2003_Iraq_memo
3.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4849744.stm
4.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11803206/Ministers-and-officials-accused-of-wrongdoing-in-Chilcot-inquiry-report-will-never-be-named.html
5.
http://gmmuk.com/tony-blair-should-be-dragged-in-shackles-to-war-crimes-court-father-of-dead-solider-says/
6.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPj5IhATZ7k