Iraq War Inquiry Opens in UK
A
public inquiry into the UK's role in the Iraq war has opened in London,
with former civil servants first to appear in hearings that will climax
with Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, taking the stand.
One-time senior officials from the foreign and defence ministries
will outline Britain's policy towards Baghdad in early 2000, as the
five-member committee investigates what lessons can be learned from the
US-led war.
A
public inquiry into the UK's role in the Iraq war has opened in London,
with former civil servants first to appear in hearings that will climax
with Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, taking the stand.
One-time senior officials from the foreign and defence ministries
will outline Britain's policy towards Baghdad in early 2000, as the
five-member committee investigates what lessons can be learned from the
US-led war.
John
Chilcot, the inquiry chairman and a former civil servant, said he was
confident of producing a "full and insightful" account of the
decision-making that led Britain to join the 2003 invasion against
strong opposition at home and abroad.
An appearance by Blair, who took Britain into the conflict, is
likely to be the highlight of the inquiry, although he and other Labour
government figures are not due to give evidence until next year.
'Unprecedented' inquiry
Shane Greer, executive editor of Total Politics,
a British political magazine and website, told Al Jazeera that he
believes the inquiry will uncover new information about the Iraq war.
"First of all the scope of this inquiry is absolutely unprecedented.
"Already
back in July Sir John [Chilcot] began speaking with families of injured
and killed soldiers ... now he's going onto the spy chiefs, civil
servants ... and moving onto politicians.
"So I think we're going to see much more from this inquiry than any
previous inquiry, because of course the frame of reference is so much
wider, the access to information is so much wider.
"And also the inquiry has been given the power to apportion blame which really is quite incredible."
'No trial'
Chilcot has said that nobody will be on trial in the inquiry, held
at a conference centre near parliament in central London, but has also
vowed not to shy away from any criticism if the findings warrant it.
"No-one is on trial here. We cannot determine guilt or innocence. Only a court can do that.
"But I
make a commitment here that once we get to our final report, we will
not shy away from making criticisms, either of institutions or
processes or individuals, where they are truly warranted," he said in
opening remarks.
Chilcot and his fellow committee members have already met families
of some of the 179 British troops who died during the six-year
conflict, who raised issues about whether they were properly equipped
and trained.
The inquiry will also look into the
justification for the war, principally the claim that Saddam Hussein,
the former Iraqi president, had weapons of mass destruction. These weapons were never found.
Among the first witnesses to be called on Tuesday is Peter Ricketts,
who chaired the government's senior intelligence committee between 2000
and 2001 before taking a senior post at the Foreign Office (FCO)
between 2001 and 2003.
Also due to present statements at the hearing are William Patey, the
former head of the FCO's Middle East department; Simon Webb, the fomer
head of operational policy at the Ministry of Defence; and Michael
Wood, an former FCO legal adviser.
War 'legality'
Families of soldiers who died in the conflict have said they want "honest" answers from the inquiry.
Rose Gentle, whose son Gordon died in Iraq in 2004, said: "We do
hope that the committee are going to be honest ... I don't know why he
died until the end of this inquiry," she said.
Demonstrators
have protested outside the conference venue, with some dressed up as
former US and UK leaders with blood on their hands.
Anti-war
campaigners are calling for a ruling on the legality of the conflict,
which was carried out without explicit approval by the United Nations
Security Council.
Two official investigations into the run-up to
the war have already taken place, but ministers had refused to hold a
full inquiry until after the military deployment had ended.
Analysts have said the inquiry is incapable of addressing the key
issue of whether the invasion was legal, because of a lack of lawyers
and judges on its six-member committee.
An unnamed senior judge told The Guardian newspaper that analysing the war's legality was beyond the committee's competence.
Source:
Agencies
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A
public inquiry into the UK's role in the Iraq war has opened in London,
with former civil servants first to appear in hearings that will climax
with Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, taking the stand.
One-time senior officials from the foreign and defence ministries
will outline Britain's policy towards Baghdad in early 2000, as the
five-member committee investigates what lessons can be learned from the
US-led war.
John
Chilcot, the inquiry chairman and a former civil servant, said he was
confident of producing a "full and insightful" account of the
decision-making that led Britain to join the 2003 invasion against
strong opposition at home and abroad.
An appearance by Blair, who took Britain into the conflict, is
likely to be the highlight of the inquiry, although he and other Labour
government figures are not due to give evidence until next year.
'Unprecedented' inquiry
Shane Greer, executive editor of Total Politics,
a British political magazine and website, told Al Jazeera that he
believes the inquiry will uncover new information about the Iraq war.
"First of all the scope of this inquiry is absolutely unprecedented.
"Already
back in July Sir John [Chilcot] began speaking with families of injured
and killed soldiers ... now he's going onto the spy chiefs, civil
servants ... and moving onto politicians.
"So I think we're going to see much more from this inquiry than any
previous inquiry, because of course the frame of reference is so much
wider, the access to information is so much wider.
"And also the inquiry has been given the power to apportion blame which really is quite incredible."
'No trial'
Chilcot has said that nobody will be on trial in the inquiry, held
at a conference centre near parliament in central London, but has also
vowed not to shy away from any criticism if the findings warrant it.
"No-one is on trial here. We cannot determine guilt or innocence. Only a court can do that.
"But I
make a commitment here that once we get to our final report, we will
not shy away from making criticisms, either of institutions or
processes or individuals, where they are truly warranted," he said in
opening remarks.
Chilcot and his fellow committee members have already met families
of some of the 179 British troops who died during the six-year
conflict, who raised issues about whether they were properly equipped
and trained.
The inquiry will also look into the
justification for the war, principally the claim that Saddam Hussein,
the former Iraqi president, had weapons of mass destruction. These weapons were never found.
Among the first witnesses to be called on Tuesday is Peter Ricketts,
who chaired the government's senior intelligence committee between 2000
and 2001 before taking a senior post at the Foreign Office (FCO)
between 2001 and 2003.
Also due to present statements at the hearing are William Patey, the
former head of the FCO's Middle East department; Simon Webb, the fomer
head of operational policy at the Ministry of Defence; and Michael
Wood, an former FCO legal adviser.
War 'legality'
Families of soldiers who died in the conflict have said they want "honest" answers from the inquiry.
Rose Gentle, whose son Gordon died in Iraq in 2004, said: "We do
hope that the committee are going to be honest ... I don't know why he
died until the end of this inquiry," she said.
Demonstrators
have protested outside the conference venue, with some dressed up as
former US and UK leaders with blood on their hands.
Anti-war
campaigners are calling for a ruling on the legality of the conflict,
which was carried out without explicit approval by the United Nations
Security Council.
Two official investigations into the run-up to
the war have already taken place, but ministers had refused to hold a
full inquiry until after the military deployment had ended.
Analysts have said the inquiry is incapable of addressing the key
issue of whether the invasion was legal, because of a lack of lawyers
and judges on its six-member committee.
An unnamed senior judge told The Guardian newspaper that analysing the war's legality was beyond the committee's competence.
Source:
Agencies
A
public inquiry into the UK's role in the Iraq war has opened in London,
with former civil servants first to appear in hearings that will climax
with Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, taking the stand.
One-time senior officials from the foreign and defence ministries
will outline Britain's policy towards Baghdad in early 2000, as the
five-member committee investigates what lessons can be learned from the
US-led war.
John
Chilcot, the inquiry chairman and a former civil servant, said he was
confident of producing a "full and insightful" account of the
decision-making that led Britain to join the 2003 invasion against
strong opposition at home and abroad.
An appearance by Blair, who took Britain into the conflict, is
likely to be the highlight of the inquiry, although he and other Labour
government figures are not due to give evidence until next year.
'Unprecedented' inquiry
Shane Greer, executive editor of Total Politics,
a British political magazine and website, told Al Jazeera that he
believes the inquiry will uncover new information about the Iraq war.
"First of all the scope of this inquiry is absolutely unprecedented.
"Already
back in July Sir John [Chilcot] began speaking with families of injured
and killed soldiers ... now he's going onto the spy chiefs, civil
servants ... and moving onto politicians.
"So I think we're going to see much more from this inquiry than any
previous inquiry, because of course the frame of reference is so much
wider, the access to information is so much wider.
"And also the inquiry has been given the power to apportion blame which really is quite incredible."
'No trial'
Chilcot has said that nobody will be on trial in the inquiry, held
at a conference centre near parliament in central London, but has also
vowed not to shy away from any criticism if the findings warrant it.
"No-one is on trial here. We cannot determine guilt or innocence. Only a court can do that.
"But I
make a commitment here that once we get to our final report, we will
not shy away from making criticisms, either of institutions or
processes or individuals, where they are truly warranted," he said in
opening remarks.
Chilcot and his fellow committee members have already met families
of some of the 179 British troops who died during the six-year
conflict, who raised issues about whether they were properly equipped
and trained.
The inquiry will also look into the
justification for the war, principally the claim that Saddam Hussein,
the former Iraqi president, had weapons of mass destruction. These weapons were never found.
Among the first witnesses to be called on Tuesday is Peter Ricketts,
who chaired the government's senior intelligence committee between 2000
and 2001 before taking a senior post at the Foreign Office (FCO)
between 2001 and 2003.
Also due to present statements at the hearing are William Patey, the
former head of the FCO's Middle East department; Simon Webb, the fomer
head of operational policy at the Ministry of Defence; and Michael
Wood, an former FCO legal adviser.
War 'legality'
Families of soldiers who died in the conflict have said they want "honest" answers from the inquiry.
Rose Gentle, whose son Gordon died in Iraq in 2004, said: "We do
hope that the committee are going to be honest ... I don't know why he
died until the end of this inquiry," she said.
Demonstrators
have protested outside the conference venue, with some dressed up as
former US and UK leaders with blood on their hands.
Anti-war
campaigners are calling for a ruling on the legality of the conflict,
which was carried out without explicit approval by the United Nations
Security Council.
Two official investigations into the run-up to
the war have already taken place, but ministers had refused to hold a
full inquiry until after the military deployment had ended.
Analysts have said the inquiry is incapable of addressing the key
issue of whether the invasion was legal, because of a lack of lawyers
and judges on its six-member committee.
An unnamed senior judge told The Guardian newspaper that analysing the war's legality was beyond the committee's competence.
Source:
Agencies