No wonder you need a bodyguard, Mr Blair
Families’ fury at smiling ex-PM on eve of Iraq report
GRINNING as he steps out of a bullet-proof Land Rover, Tony Blair prepares to face the flak from the long-awaited inquiry report into the Iraq war.
Flanked by a burly bodyguard, the former prime minister is all smiles despite being braced for stinging criticism of his role in leading Britain into the disastrous conflict, which cost the lives of 179 UK personnel.
Bereaved relatives will find out exactly why their loved ones were sent to their deaths by the Labour leader when the Iraq Inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot publishes his 2.6million-word report this morning.
But they were furious at Mr Blair’s nonchalant smirk as he was dropped off near his offices in Grosvenor Square, Mayfair, yesterday. Peter Brierley, 65, the father of Lance Corporal Shaun Brierley, one of the
‘He thinks he’s done nothing wrong’
first soldiers to die in the controversial war, said: ‘What has he got to smile at? Ordering young men and women to be killed on the basis of a lie is nothing to laugh at.’
Mr Brierley, from Batley, West Yorkshire, added: ‘He is in denial. He thinks he’s done nothing wrong. But I hope there is enough in the report that we can get him into a court. That would wipe the smirk off his face.’
Last night Sir John warned that he had sharpened his knives to condemn senior politicians, Whitehall mandarins, diplomats, intelligence officials and military commanders. He sought to quell mounting concern among families that the inquiry, which has taken seven years and cost more than £10million, would be a ‘whitewash’.
Speaking on the eve of publishing the report, the retired civil servant said the inquiry had ‘not shied away’ from the decisions and behaviour of individuals.
Defending the seven years it took to complete the report, rather than the anticipated two, Sir John said the inquiry had interviewed more than 150 witnesses and examined over 150,000 government documents. He said: ‘That’s a huge task and takes a great deal of time if you’re going to get to the bottom of all of that.
‘I think getting agreement on the material that we could publish from that government archive has taken time in itself, but if we are going to give – as we believe we have – a really reliable account, we’ve had to get agreement from Government to publish some things which are quite without precedent; Cabinet discussions, discussions with other heads of state and government.’ Among the most explosive revelations will be the details of 29 secret letters, notes and conversations between Mr Blair and former US President George W Bush in the run-up to war.
The leaders are alleged to have ‘signed in blood’ an agreement to oust Saddam Hussein in secret talks at the president’s ranch in Texas a year before the March 2003 invasion without telling MPs or the public – a claim denied by Mr Blair. But Sir John’s remit has not included ruling whether the invasion was legal. There are concerns that large swathes of the report will focus on reprimanding senior military figures for not standing up to No 10 before the conflict.
Commanders are also likely to come under fire for not equipping forces in time, so they went to the frontline without enough body armour, ammunition or even boots, and in vehicles ill-prepared to tackle threats such as IEDs.
Roger Bacon, whose son Major Matthew Bacon, 34, was killed by a roadside bomb in Basra in 2005, said: ‘If the major focus of the report is on the military commanders, that is wrong.
‘The report should not use the military as an excuse to minimise the failures of the Government and Mr Blair, who took them to war in the first place.’