"Tony Blair was less than honest with his country on the road to war" by Clare Short The Times 11:01am 30th Jan, 2004   London. January 30, 2004    IN recent statements Prime Minister Tony Blair has rested his case - that there were WMD in Iraq - on the intelligence he received. But the truth is that the intelligence was exaggerated. The intelligence agencies thought that Iraq had chemical and biological programs and probably some capacity to use some chemical weapons within Iraq. The continuing failure to find any WMD confirms that they were wrong in that assessment.    But there is no doubt that the intelligence was exaggerated for political reasons. This issue is causing enormous controversy in the US and it has been repeatedly made clear by former security services staff in the US and Australia that the intelligence was exaggerated in order to make the case for war.    But behind all this, and the tragedy that befell David Kelly, lie the big questions on which the Hutton report, released this week, does not comment. It is still clear that Britain's Prime Minister committed himself to support a US war in Iraq before the northern summer of 2002. He therefore lost the leverage that Britain could have exercised to persuade the US that, since there was no imminent threat from Iraq, we should start with implementing the road map to Palestinian statehood.    He should have also insisted that we should work through the UN and exhaust all possible means before resorting to war. This was the proud role Britain could have played -- acting as a bridge between the US and Europe and helping to end the central cause of division and bitterness in the Middle East.    Instead, it remains the case that the Prime Minister promised the British people that there would be war only if authorised by a second UN resolution. But he had also promised the US we would be with them. When the Security Council would not support war before Hans Blix had completed his work, he excused his failure to keep his promise on the second resolution by misleading us on the French position.    In fact, President Jacques Chirac said he would veto any resolution at that time, but would support a resolution authorising war if UN weapons inspector Blix's efforts failed. Instead we were repeatedly told that the French had said they would veto any second resolution.    On top of all this, the Prime Minister promised a UN mandate for the reconstruction of Iraq. But when the US refused to allow the UN its proper role in bringing into being an interim Iraqi government, the Prime Minister gave in again and thus failed to legitimise and internationalise the reconstruction process.    Hutton does not deal with the big question of whether Blair was less than honest with his country on the road to war. I am afraid it remains my conclusion that through a series of deceits, half-truths and omissions, Blair took the UK into a war in support of America which has strengthened al-Qa'ida, further destabilised the Middle East and increased the suffering of the people of Iraq.    I have no doubt that Blair thought he was doing the right thing and still thinks he did the right thing by going to war. The question remains whether it is acceptable for a Prime Minister to be economical with the truth when committing the country to war.    (Clare Short was international development secretary in the British Government from 1997 to 2003. This is an extract from The Times).    London.February 2, 2004    "Blair adviser slammed for bullying tactics" by Peter Fray. Europe Correspondent.( The Age).    The BBC's former director-general has accused Downing Street of systematically bullying it over its coverage of the Iraq war even before it aired the flawed report at the centre of the Hutton controversy.    Greg Dyke, who resigned last week after the Hutton report, told the Sunday Times that Alastair Campbell, Downing Street's communication chief, had waged a war of attrition against the BBC's coverage.    Mr Dyke's intervention will dash hopes of an immediate end to the post-Hutton row between the Government and the BBC, which has thrown it into the biggest crisis of its 82 years.    Lord Hutton last week castigated the BBC for broadcasting unfounded allegations that No. 10 had sexed up its dossier on Iraq's weapons with information it knew to be wrong.    A YouGov poll for the ITV television network has found that more than half of British voters believed the Hutton inquiry was a whitewash and that No.10 had embellished the dossier that claimed Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.    Only 26 per cent of people surveyed by YouGov believed Lord Hutton's report was balanced, despite his reputation for impartiality.    Mr Dyke said the Hutton report had failed to acknowledge the pressure that No.10 had put on the BBC during the Iraq war.    This included demanding the withdrawal from Baghdad of the BBC's popular and courageous correspondent, Rageh Omaar. Mr Dyke, the BBC's chairman, Gavyn Davies, and defence reporter Andrew Gilligan, have resigned from the BBC since the report cleared the Government of any wrongdoing over the death of British weapons scientist David Kelly.    Gilligan has described the repercussions of the Hutton report as the worst week of his life, and criticised the BBC's governors for looking flabbergasted the day it was released.    "Most of my story was right. I did accuse the Government of exaggeration, and I still do," he wrote in the Sunday Times.    The BBC's acting chairman, Lord Ryder, has apologised unreservedly to Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Government over the story.    The Government is said to be looking for a Tory grandee, possibly former Hong Kong governor Chris Patten, to take over from Mr Davies as a way of ending the controversy.    Dr Kelly, who killed himself in July, was effectively named by the Ministry of Defence as the source for Gilligan's exaggerated story.    Mr Blair, who is expected to address a parliamentary committee about Iraq's weapons next week, has maintained that former Iraq leader Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons, but none have been found.    Two new polls yesterday found most Britons wanted an independent inquiry into why the country went to war.    But Mr Blair has dismissed the need for an independent inquiry into Iraq's WMD. He is reportedly concerned that US President George Bush may undermine his position.    In another development, Dr Kelly's widow, Janice, said she was deeply disappointed by Lord Hutton's failure to criticise the Government, and was considering suing the Ministry of Defence for failing in its duty of care to her husband.    Mrs Kelly was also investigating the possibility of a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, which would uphold a person's right to privacy, The Mail on Sunday said.
	Next (more recent) news item
	Next (older) news item