In a commentary for The Independent, Oliver Miles finally popped the question - is Blair a war criminal? According to him, the upcoming inquiry on Iraq will be different from the previous ones given many unresolved questions will be asked such as whether this was 'a war of aggression and therefore a war crime?... the alleged links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qa'ida? – it seems there were no such links... [and] the civil planning for after the fighting?'

In the Telegraph, Gilligan reported 'on the secret Government reports on “lessons learnt” which shed new light on “significant shortcomings” at all levels'. These documents include 'full transcripts of extraordinarily frank classified interviews in which British Army commanders vent their frustration and anger with ministers and Whitehall officials'.

Serious doubts on Blair and his administration were being voiced especially pertaining to whether the former had knowingly mislead the Brits:

... Tony Blair, the former prime minister, misled MPs and the public throughout 2002 when he claimed that Britain’s objective was “disarmament, not regime change” and that there had been no planning for military action. In fact, British military planning for a full invasion and regime change began in February 2002...

Or that they had rushed into the war without any due regard of safety for the soldiers:

... Operations were so under-resourced that some troops went into action with only five bullets each. Others had to deploy to war on civilian airlines, taking their equipment as hand luggage. Some troops had weapons confiscated by airport security....

These revelations aren't exactly news though they do merely confirm the nagging suspicions that most observers have on the Blair administration. Bob Woodward in his trilogy of Bush has also noted similar findings on the American administration - that Bush and his gang of crazies had absolutely no idea on how to go about invading Iraq (except a heavy military invasion on a country that has been destroyed by the first Gulf War ten years ago, further punished by UN sanctions).

Now, we can know with certainty that this war was not provoked nor a result of Hussein concealing WMD. Neither was it about international security or fighting Al Qaeda.

Such disclosures aside, the more pressing question with this saga in the UK can perhaps be summed up as such:

Can we prosecute the PMs and Presidents who have mislead the people of US, UK and Australia into the Iraq war under international legal mechanisms? Given that various activist organisations have tried (but lost the momentum or chance), would more undisclosed government documents (gradually being revealed) provide an impetus for future action? Or is the world likely to treat the invasion of Iraq as a non-issue with the passing of time and begrudgingly accept the notion that some governments do misled the public at times?

 TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (5)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/hide comments

joni: ...

Absolutely he should be held to account. I am astonished that the public is willing to gloss over the reasons for going to war - which have proved to be totally false. Remember that they gave us absolute confirmation that they had evidence and proof of the WMD's.

1

Mon 23 Nov 2009 14:11:42 EST

jane: ...

And we all, except for the gullible diehards, knew they were lying through their teeth. The three flamingos and their hangers-on should be held to account, imo. Their cynical decision has been very costly in both Iraqi lives and of the soldiers they marched off to be killed.

I agree with you 100%, joni. This is a very serious breach of trust; invading another country knowing the reasons for said invasion are false, is up there with Hitler and Poland, imo.

Bush, Blair and Howard are a disgrace!

2

Mon 23 Nov 2009 14:51:31 EST

Min: ...

Agreed joni...there are still quite a number of people who believe that Hussein had WMDs (although none were ever found) and likewise that people threw their children overboard.

Obviously there will be never be any retractions of the above...and those responsible for fibs and porkies making headlines in Australian newspapers will just shake their heads and say Who Me? Not my responsibility.

3

Mon 23 Nov 2009 14:53:41 EST

jane: ...

Min, @3, sadly I think you're right.

4

Mon 23 Nov 2009 15:52:02 EST

Evan: ...

Ah, the chickens finally coming home to roost.

About time too.

5

Tue 24 Nov 2009 09:07:42 EST