Chilcot:
What Can We Learn From a Report That Ignores Iraqis?
If Blair and Bush were sincere about the dangers of
weapons of mass destruction, they would have invaded
North Korea
By Robert Fisk
July 08, 2016
"Information
Clearing House"
- "The
Independent"
-
So where are
the Titans now? I’ve often asked that question but
today, I realise, Blair wanted to be a Titan. Up
there with the Churchills and the Roosevelts and
Titos and – dare I suggest – the Stalins. Men who
made the earth move. Maybe that’s why Chilcot’s
achievement was not to prove that Blair was a war
criminal but that he was a midget.
Just take
that cringing quotation to Bush on 28 July 2002. “I
will be with you, whatever.” Sure, we understand the
political importance of this tosh. Blair was trying
to sound Titan-like. but proved in legal terms that
what he meant was: I will be with you – whatever the
British people think.
But it’s
got deeper roots than that. I have a hunch this was
the Blair version of the infinitely more powerful
words of Harry Hopkins, Roosevelt’s personal
representative to wartime Britain, who – exhausted,
but asked to speak to an audience in Glasgow –
looked down the room at Churchill and tried to
express his love for the great man’s stand against
Hitler and Roosevelt’s support for Britain as she
stood alone against Nazi Germany. Hopkins quoted
the Bible. Churchill wept as he spoke. “Whither thou
goest,” Hopkins said, “I will go… Even unto the
end.”
And the
best our little Tony could say was: “I will be with
you, whatever.” It’s the “whatever” bit that gives
the game away, of course; a kind of tossed-out line,
the midget’s version of “even unto the end”, an
“aw-shucks
come-hell-or-high-water, you can rely on me”.
And this,
remember, was not a spokesman for the US president
telling the British prime minister that he could
depend on America. Wee Tony tweaked the whole sorry
quotation to turn himself into Roosevelt, and Bush
into Churchill. So earnest was he in the imitative
role he had constructed for himself that Blair could
not see, when he used these words, that they
undermined any moral foundation the future invasion
of Iraq might have had in British eyes.
But I’m
already tired of the “lessons” of the Chilcot
report. We must learn from what we did wrong, we
mustn’t do it again – Cameron repeated the same
doggerel, although he might apply it to his own
knavish Brexit tricks – and we really, really must
get it right before we blunder into more wars that
cost hundreds of British lives, millions of dollars
and tens of thousands of other chaps who got in the
way but don’t feature as human beings in the Chilcot
report.
That’s the
real problem, I fear, with the flagellation of Lord
Blair. Yes, he sure was a nasty piece of work, lying
to us Brits and then lying to us again after Chilcot
was published, and then waffling on about faith and
“the right thing to do” when we all know that
smiting vast numbers of innocent people – and even
bringing about the smiting of a vaster number of the
very same Muslims, Christians and Yazidis up to this
very day – was a very, very bad thing to do. For
these victims – anonymous and almost irrelevant in
the Chilcot report – we cannot say “even unto the
end”, because they are dying unto the present day.
The real “end” for these victims cometh not even
yet.
But here’s
an underlying dishonesty about Chilcot’s reflection
on Blair’s dishonesty. The evidence of weapons of
mass destruction (WMDs) was not strong enough, but
it was – according to Lord Blair – still worth
getting rid of Saddam. But surely if he was really
sincere about the dangers of WMDs, he and Bush would
have invaded a nation which undeniably did possess
and boasted about them: North Korea.
Now there’s
a crazed dictatorship, butchering its own people,
threatening the world – in 2003, just as today – yet
not once has anyone, let alone Blair, suggested we
should invade North Korea even unto the end and all
the way up to the Yalu river. And we know why.
Because North Korea really does have WMDs.
Lord Blair and Bush would never have dared consider
a military adventure against the beloved Kim Jong-un.
For the same reason, Blair would never have
advocated the invasion of a Muslim nation which is
packed with Islamist extremists who knife, shoot and
burn to death their infidel enemies and who also
possess nuclear weapons, WMDs writ large and boasted
about and tested: Pakistan.
I’m leaving
out here a peace-loving Middle East nation which
possesses even more nuclear weapons than Pakistan
and North Korea combined, but mercifully treats all
those it occupies with immense respect, never steals
their land and always treats those others with whom
it comes into contact during colonisation projects
with total respect for their human rights. Yet why
not mention, for that matter, the Iranians? Blair
has an odd habit of targeting enemies which are also
hated by the aforesaid peace-loving nation – and
would presumably like to assault before they
actually are able to possess nuclear weapons and
therefore immediately become un-invadeable.
Poor old
Saddam, he told the truth – that he didn’t have WMDs
– and thus doomed both himself and the poor old
Iraqis to mass death.
And that’s
the point, isn’t it? The Arabs of Iraq – and now
Syria – endure human disaster on an unprecedented
scale because of the Blair-Bush lies, yet all
Chilcot can produce with his seven years of literary
endeavour and volumes to break the strength of any
library shelf is a puny little domestic report on
British politics and the self-righteousness of the
midget who got it all wrong.
We weep for
our British military martyrs, for such is how the
Arabs refer to their wartime dead, yet scarcely a
single suffering Arab was to be heard in the
aftermath of Chilcot. The Iraqis were not allowed to
give evidence; the dead Muslims and Christians of
Iraq had no-one to plead for the integrity of their
lives. Had their case been made, Chilcot’s report
would have gone on to the crack of doom. It would
have been longer than the Holy Bible, the Holy
Koran, the entire corpus of Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky,
Chekhov, Proust, Shakespeare and Dante – though the
latter’s circles of hell would certainly have caught
the measure of the suffering of Iraq and Syria.
No. It was,
in reality, a midget report on a midget man. That’s
why, if we brought in the real human beings called
Iraqis, their evidence would have indeed been worth
a Nuremburg trial. And yet, in the end, weren’t the
ranks of obsequious, strutting, lying and defeated
Nazis on the bench at Nuremburg also midgets? Even
unto the end. Whatever.
|