Support 100 years of independent journalism.

29 January 2010

Chilcot at lunchtime: a walk in the park for articulate Blair

Selective quotes bandied around amid wasted opportunity.

By James Macintyre

Some of the questions from the Chilcot panel of the latest “Iraq inquiry” have been pertinent and to the point. Much progress has been made over the question of legality, and today Tony Blair was pressed — albeit only once — on the lack of any link between the 11 September 2001 attacks and Saddam Hussein.

However, in the end this has been not just an anticlimax in media terms, but a wasted opportunity in terms of scrutiny. The day-long discussion has emerged as a chat, with both the panel and Blair able to reach for selective references and quotations from the hundreds of documents surrounding the build-up to war.

Blair, for example, uses specific lines from the reports of the UN’s chief weapons inspector Hans Blix, who, on the other hand, told Mehdi Hasan this week of his grave concerns about the drumbeat to war in 2003.

Blair has put on another of his classic performances; the old master has lost none of his skill. In fact, if anything, he appears more on top of his brief than he was in office. The same thing happened when he testified last year to a Commons committee on the Israel-Palestine conflict, about which he is clearly much better informed these days.

Sign up for The New Statesman’s newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. The New Statesman’s global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. Our weekly culture newsletter – from books and art to pop culture and memes – sent every Friday. A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. A weekly dig into the New Statesman’s archive of over 100 years of stellar and influential journalism, sent each Wednesday. Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.
I consent to New Statesman Media Group collecting my details provided via this form in accordance with the Privacy Policy

Meanwhile, the panel has again allowed itself to be distracted by certain red herrings — 9/11, Bush’s position throughout, even old arguments over WMDs — while sometimes backing Blair’s points and occasionally even finishing his sentences.

All the while, it has failed to pinpoint important quotations and pieces of evidence and ask Blair short, sharp questions that would have prevented him from being able to think quickly, as he does so well, of an answer during the question. Blair has not, for example, been pressed properly on the crucial Manning memo of March 2002 showing Blair’s commitment to “regime change” a full year before the invasion.

But then again, Manning himself, bizarrely and frustratingly, was not asked about his own memo, either.

This inquiry is better informed, broader and has fuller context than the previous investigations into the Iraq war, especially Hutton. But — watching Blair run rings around the panel members today — it is hard to see that it will achieve anything more than its predecessors.

Follow the New Statesman team on Twitter