Chilcot savages Blair for rushing into poorly planned and legally dodgy Iraq War
Chilcot Inquiry report concludes Tony Blair rushed ill-prepared troops to war with no imminent threat
TONY Blair’s reputation was in ruins last night after the long awaited Iraq report revealed a war doomed from the start by a devastating litany of establishment failures and deceptions.
Delivering the scathing verdict, its boss Sir John Chilcot yesterday branded the 2003 invasion “almost a complete failure”.
His report labelled the six year-long saga that saw 179 British troops killed “an intervention which went badly wrong, with consequences to this day”.
The 2.3 million word long, 13 volume report stunned Westminster with its startlingly brutal conclusions when it was published at 11.30am.
Ten most damning findings
1. Blair rushed to war prematurely, plotting with George Bush to oust Saddam as early as December 2001
2. UK invaded "before the peaceful options for disarmament were exhausted
3. Attorney General's advice was "not clear" and "far from satisfactory"
4. Spy chiefs should have told PM information on WMDs was not "beyond doubt"
5. War was "not the last resort", there was "no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein"
6. Catastrophic failure to plan property for war. Serious equipment shortfalls left troops in deep jeopardy
7. Planning for post-war Iraq was "wholly inadequate"
8. The Blair Government "failed to achieve its stated objectives"
9. Blair ignored major warnings about the invasion hiking up terror threats
10. British troops showed noble "courage" and dedication but were doomed to fail
It found Blair rushed to war prematurely, plotting with George Bush to oust Saddam as early as December 2001 just three months after 9/11.
The war’s legality was cast into fresh doubt after the report said with the top government lawyer’s advice was “not clear” and “far from satisfactory.”
There were major intelligence failings by spy chiefs, who should have told the Labour PM their information on WMDs was not “beyond doubt.”
Worst of all, there was a catastrophic failure to plan properly for the war and its aftermath, meaning serious equipment shortfalls left troops in deep jeopardy.
The report also says there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein in March 2003 and Mr Blair took us to war ‘before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted’.
Sir John said: “Military action at that time was not a last resort.”
The Government then told MPs and the public about the intelligence threat posed by Iraq’s WMD with a “certainty that was not justified.”
Attorney General Lord Goldsmith had only agreed that the invasion would be legal based on assurances from Mr Blair that Iraq had committed “material breaches” of UN resolution 1441.
But the Inquiry said it was ‘unclear’ what evidence Mr Blair had for this and branded the process ‘far from satisfactory.’
The report dismissed the ex-PM’s claims that he could not have known how difficult the post-invasion situation would be.
Tony Blair says he declared war in Iraq 'in good faith'
Responding to the publication of the Chilcot Report Tony Blair said:
“The report should lay to rest allegations of bad faith, lies or deceit. Whether people agree or disagree with my decision to take military action against Saddam Hussein; I took it in good faith and in what I believed to be the best interests of the country.
I note that the report finds clearly:
- That there was no falsification or improper use of Intelligence (para 876 vol 4)
- No deception of Cabinet (para 953 vol 5)
- No secret commitment to war whether at Crawford Texas in April 2002 or elsewhere (para 572 onwards vol 1)
The inquiry does not make a finding on the legal basis for military action but finds that the Attorney General had concluded there was such a lawful basis by 13th March 2003 (para 933 vol 5)
However the report does make real and material criticisms of preparation, planning, process and of the relationship with the United States.
These are serious criticisms and they require serious answers.
I will respond in detail to them later this afternoon.
I will take full responsibility for any mistakes without exception or excuse.
I will at the same time say why, nonetheless, I believe that it was better to remove Saddam Hussein and why I do not believe this is the cause of the terrorism we see today whether in the Middle East or elsewhere in the world.
Above all I will pay tribute to our Armed Forces. I will express my profound regret at the loss of life and the grief it has caused the families, and I will set out the lessons I believe future leaders can learn from my experience.”
And the report said the Government were aware that the US had “inadequate” plans for stabilising Iraq post-invasion.
The Ministry of Defence - led by Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon - was slow to respond to the threat from Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs).
And there were “inotlerable” delays in replacing soft top LandRovers with heavily armed patrol vehicles.
Chilcot also said the “most consistent strategic objective” in Iraq was to reduce the number of British troops based there.
And the British Army suffered a humiliating defeat in Basra because there were not enough troops on the ground forcing commanders to strike a deal with militia in Basra to swap prisoners in return for an end to deadly attacks on soldiers.
Tony Blair has said that his decision to take military action against Saddam Hussain was taken ‘in good faith and in what I believed to be the best interests of the country’.
He said: ‘I can look those families and the country in the eye and tell them I did not mislead them. What
I cannot do, and will not do, is say that the decision was wrong. I think the world is a safer and better place because of it’.
Gaunt-looking Mr Blair issued a grovelling apology hours later for “mistakes on planning and process” and pleaded with Brits to understand his dilemma at the time.
The Chilcot Inquiry report final document is 2,600,000 words long - four times the length of Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace
But the 63-year-old ex-Premier also insisted invading Iraq was still “the right thing to do” and he would make the same decision all over again.
The Chilcot report - which cost £12m and took seven long years to write – is the most devastating indictment on any British government in 70 years since World War Two.
Tearful relatives of Iraq’s war dead branded Mr Blair “the world’s worst terrorist”.
The families’ lawyers are now combing the report for new evidence to allow them to pursue legal action against the ex-PM and his ministers personally.
The inquiry also published 29 private letters that Mr Blair wrote to US president George Bush, lifted the lid on their most private thoughts.
They include the key admission that Bush and Blair agreed to devise “a clever strategy” to oust tyrannical leader Saddam regime as early as December 2001, just three months after 9/11.
Blair also told America’s leader “I’m with you whatever” in July 2002, despite the inquiry finding that peaceful options were still available to contain Saddam as late as March 2003.
Giving his statement about the Chilcot Report in the House of Commons, PM David Cameron says families of those killed waited too long for it.
He has paid tribute to their service and says we must never forget them.
And he has pledged that those people who suffered life changing injuries will be looked after for the rest of their lives.
The Prime Minister said: "We cannot turn the clock back but we can ensure that these issues [highlighted by Sir John Chilcot] are acted upon.
"I do believe that there are some issues that we need to learn and keep on learning."
Was the Iraq War illegal? Tony Blair labelled as 'world's worst terrorist' by families of dead soldiers
TONY Blair relied on flawed intelligence and legal advice to go to war in Iraq in 2003, the Chilcot Inquiry has concluded.
Sir John Chilcot stopped short of saying the war was illegal, but this is not surprising as he always said he would not make a ruling on this.
And the International Criminal Court (ICC) has indicated the former Labour leader will not be liable for prosecution, reiterating its conclusion 10 years ago that the decision to go to war is not within its jurisdiction.
But relatives of some of the 179 British soldiers who died in Iraq said they would examine the report to see if there was a legal case to pursue against those responsible.
Speaking at a press conference earlier today Sarah O’Connor, whose brother Sergeant Bob O'Connor, died in the conflict, said Tony Blair is the world’s worst terrorist.
She said: “Personally, for myself, a lot of anger.
“That healing that 11 and a half years I’ve worked for - I’ve gone back to that time when I learned that my brother had been killed.
“And there’s one terrorist in this world that the world needs to be aware of. And that’s Tony Blair.
Fighting to speak through tears, she said the former Prime Minister was: “the world’s worst terrorist.”
Sir John strongly criticised Blair saying the circumstances in which the British Government decided there was a legal basis for action were far from satisfactory.
He said the threat posed by dictator Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) had been over-hyped.
Speaking at the launch of the report this morning Sir John said the British and American intelligence agencies had an “ingrained belief” that Hussein had chemical and biological warfare capabilities which he was hiding from UN inspectors.
And he said the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) should have made clear to Blair that its suspicions about WMD had not been established "beyond doubt" before he published a dossier in September 2002 setting out the supposed threat from the Iraqi leader.
Sir John said: "It is now clear that policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments.
"They were not challenged, and they should have been."
Security services slammed for "ingrained belief" about weapons of mass destruction
INTELLIGENCE chiefs in both Britain and the USA have been criticised by Sir John Chilcot in his report for “ingrained belief” that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
They believed Iraq had retained some chemical and biological capabilities, was determined to preserve and if possible enhance them – and, in the future, to acquire a nuclear capability.
And they also believed the Iraqis were able to conceal their weapon making activities from the UN inspectors.
Sir John said the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) should have made it clear to Blair that this intelligence did not establish “beyond doubt” that Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction.
But Blair believed the intelligence and published a dossier in September 2002 which said Iraq’s past, current and future capabilities were evidence of the severity of the potential threat from Iraq’s WMD.
He told the House of Commons at some point in the future that threat would become a reality.
Sir John’s report found the certainty of his statement and the dossier were not justified.
As late as March 17 2003 - three days before the invasion began - JIC chairman Sir John Scarlett continued to advise the PM that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons and the means to deploy them.
And a day later in the House of Commons, Blair pushed his point again stating he judged the possibility of terrorist groups in possession of WMD was “a real and present danger to Britain and its national security”.
He said the threat from Saddam Hussein’s arsenal could not be contained and posed a clear danger to British citizens.
Blair proposed overthrowing Saddam Hussein in secret letters 15 months BEFORE Iraq War started
A CACHE of “love letters” between Tony Blair and George W Bush revealed today show the former Labour prime minister proposed “regime change” for Iraq 15 months before war started.
In the 31 pieces of correspondence Blair advised Bush the day after 9/11 to “act now” to tackle countries with weapons of mass destruction and explain later.
The letters revealed in the Chilcot Inquiry report include a bombshell, never-before-seen note from December 2001 proposing a “strategy for regime change that builds over time” for Iraq.
It was part of a note called “The War Against Terrorism: The Second Phase” which set out skeleton approaches to terrorist threats in seven countries.
Mr Blair argued Iraq was a threat because it had weapons of mass destruction capability, was acquiring more, and had shown willingness to use it – but acknowledged there was no appetite to get rid of Saddam Hussein.
Written 15 months before the Iraq War started, Mr Blair suggested a “softening up” strategy to win over international opinion “until we get to the point where military action could be taken whatever”.
The collection of correspondence also includes the now infamous pledge that he would be “with you, whatever” on Iraq.
The existence of Mr Blair’s promise in 2002 – which alarmed British diplomats at the time – has long been known but never published until today.
And, in evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry, the then Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell said Tony Blair sidelined the Cabinet over Iraq because he couldn’t trust ministers not to leak information
The inquiry heard that in the months leading up to the 2003 invasion, the cabinet rarely discussed Iraq.
Disastrous planning failures led to British troops sent to war without sufficient body armour
BRITISH troops were sent to Iraq without the proper kit, the Chilcot Inquiry report found today.
It said the disastrous failure to plan properly for both the war and keeping the peace after the end of the conflict led to serious equipment shortfalls and an inadequate plan.
It also found that both military and political leaders failed to act quickly enough to counter the threat from Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs).
Sir John Chilcot’s report said: “Between 2003 and 2009, UK forces in Iraq faced gaps in some key capability areas, including protected mobility, Istar and helicopter support.”
Speaking today he said: “We have found that the Ministry of Defence was slow in responding to the threat from Improvised Explosive Devices and that delays in providing adequate medium weight protected patrol vehicles should not have been tolerated.”
The inquiry into the war had already heard how troops did not have sufficient body armour because the military “simply didn’t have enough time” to get the necessary equipment.
Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, then head of the UK’s armed forces, told the hearing they weren’t given enough time to prepare.
He told the Chilcot inquiry that being given six months to prepare – instead of the four defence chiefs were given – would have made a “significant difference” to the provision of kit.
Stirrup said: “The problem of course was that we simply didn’t have enough time, as it turned out, to do everything we needed to do before the operation started.”
He added: “I think in part for both clothing and body armour, the issue was it was all done so rapidly at the last minute, no one was quite sure who had what.
“For example, just before the start of operations, the clear message that we were receiving in the Ministry of Defence was that all unit demands for enhanced combat body armour had been met. But quite clearly not everybody who needed it in theatre got it.”
Blair attacked for failing post-war challenge of bringing peace to Iraq
SIR John Chilcot has slammed Tony Blair’s view that post-invasion problems could not have been known about before the Iraq War.
Thirteen years after British and American troops went in to Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein the country remains in chaos.
ISIS controls large areas of the country and 250 people died on Saturday in Baghdad's worst car bombing since the U.S.-led coalition got rid of the dictator.
In his report Sir John said Blair and his Government should have known about the risks of what would happen after troops pulled out.
Speaking today he said: “The risks of internal strife in Iraq, active Iranian pursuit of its interests, regional instability, and Al Qaida activity in Iraq, were each explicitly identified before the invasion.
“Ministers were aware of the inadequacy of US plans, and concerned about the inability to exert significant influence on US planning.
“Mr Blair eventually succeeded only in the narrow goal of securing President Bush’s agreement that there should be UN authorisation of the post-conflict role.
“Furthermore, he did not establish clear Ministerial oversight of UK planning and preparation.
“He did not ensure that there was a flexible, realistic and fully resourced plan that integrated UK military and civilian contributions, and addressed the known risks.”
Britain’s aim was to help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq at peace with itself and its neighbours.
In his damning report, Sir John says this failed because the Government failed to take account of what a massive task this was – and Government departments failed to step up to the challenge.
He added: “The UK effort in post-conflict Iraq never matched the scale of the challenge.
“Whitehall departments and their Ministers failed to put collective weight behind the task.
“In practice, the UK’s most consistent strategic objective in relation to Iraq was to reduce the level of its deployed forces.
“The security situation in both Baghdad and the South East began to deteriorate soon after the invasion.”