Comment: Iraq, Chilcot, IS - Why Blair Is Still On The Run

If Iraq had not happened I wonder how Tony Blair would have rated today? But it did happen and now Mr Blair is having to explain his case all over again - this time on a CNN TV show.

 

He says to go into Iraq after Saddam Hussein was the toughest decision he had to make. Wrong Mr Blair. 

 

The then US President George W. Bush was already going into Iraq. Tony Blair went along for the ride to glory, overwhelmed by the aura surrounding true power. He would have enjoyed being a US President.

 

He says he was sorry that the intelligence that swung his decision to go get Saddam was not so good.  Wrong Mr Blair.

 

The intelligence at all levels was enough to tell us that the military threat was non-existent. Weapons of Mass Disappearance.

 

He says if they had not gone after Saddam then Iraq would have become the same as Syria is today. Wrong Mr Blair.

 

Syrians started the Damascus demos because of the Arab Spring and Assad had a second-rate security operation. 

 

There was no revolution brewing in the Middle East in 2003 and Saddam ran the tightest Sunni security operation anyone had seen. Only a dead man walking would have tried a demo in Saddam's Iraq that year.

 

He says that just maybe IS or Daesh or ISIS may have emerged because of the war in Iraq. Wrong Mr Blair.

 

IS emerged not because there was a war but because the coalition pulled out far too soon - leaving a state convulsed by revenge politics and no military and security apparatus capable of identifying extremism. Above all, IS started in Syria, not Iraq.

 

 

So what is this all about? It is about the forthcoming preliminary publication of the Chilcot inquiry set up to look at the 'who did what and why' of the Iraq war. Mr Blair gave evidence and did a good job. Others who also gave evidence - but contradicted Mr Blair. That they gave their evidence in a way to protect their own skins is neither here nor there now. Mr Blair is an easy and not much a moving target.

 

The point is that Tony Blair has already read the Chilcot paragraphs about himself. He knows the criticisms and by having his people go through the transcripts (the evidence text is on line for anyone to read) he also knows that the general public impression is that the war was bad news and his part in it is condemned by his own people. That is not Chilcot's fault. Most people believed that anyway.

 

So the former British Prime Minister is going public with his defence anticipating reaction to Chilcot. Simple as that. It matters not what Chilcot says. In fact most people will never read it. Anyone left who cares wants the Blair Guilty headlines. We have had them so many times that except for insiders, Chilcot matters not.

 

You may think Mr Blair is cutting a sad enough figure; then again you may be among those who say he has become a multi millionaire so what's the problem. The truth is somewhat deeper.

 

It is hard to remember sometimes that Tony Blair was not just Iraq. For example he made his party electable and since he left office it has never again been so. Blair's supreme achievement was not teaming up with George W. Bush but being a main figure in bringing about a peace settlement in Northern Ireland. There was a string of successes for PM Blair and but for one thing he could today even be on someone's list of a future Prime Minister returning to rescue a party that has descended to almost nothing without him. A grand old man of politics. A world statesman. 

 

Instead? Forever in British eyes: Tony Blair is on the run.