Global Policy Forum

By Simon Carr

The liason committee had its biannual audience with the Prime Minister yesterday. In the dark hour before war, Mr Blair presented himself to the grand heads of the select committees. They are Parliament's greybeards, they've independent voices often at odds with the Government. They're the best we've got. They were perceptibly less useless than the last time they found themselves in the prime ministerial presence.

A few posed questions we ourselves would like to ask: "Is there any link between al-Qa'ida, Iraq and terrorist groups in Britain?" Blair watchers were astonished when the Prime Minister said: "No."

Frankness and clarity are not what we associate with Mr Blair, particularly when he is saying "to make it absolutely clear, to be completely frank, to be honest, to be perfectly honest, to be blunt about it, to be completely blunt," as he did all morning. "All I'm doing is being open with people," he repeated, in the middle of a deft evasion.

"So, the US government knows of no link, either?" Alan Williams went on. Hang on, let's not go that far. There are people in Iraq that have links. Without suggesting there are links with the regime though there might be it can't be said there aren't no people without links, the Prime Minister told us absolutely bluntly. "I've said what I've said, and I don't think I can add to it."

Peter Pike asked what the war would do to oil prices; the Prime Minister's answer included the words "international consensus, global development against poverty, attacking the breeding grounds where these ideas develop, get people to come together." He said what he said.

However, Mr Blair confirmed absolutely clearly, frankly and bluntly that war would not be prevented by an "irresponsible veto" in the Security Council. Ed Leigh, eyes popping, asked whether we were seriously to believe that one of the great powers France, Russia, China nations who consider things so carefully, would "irresponsibly veto" another UN resolution?

"No, I'm not saying that,' the Prime Minister replied, "I'm saying the opposite." Of course; we should know that by now. Only John Horan (chair of the unheard-of Environmental Audit Committee) had the gumption to interrupt answers when they strayed away from the question. When Mr Blair denied that an invasion would stimulate Arab fanaticism, Mr Horan pointed out that Osama's al-Qa'ida was formed as a direct response to the American invasion of Kuwait. There was no evading that. As this was heroic of Mr Horan, it's unlikely we'll hear of him again. But Mr Blair failed to carry the committee on his raison d'íªtre for war the link between weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. Certainly, he never made clear how an invasion of Iraq would stop Algerians dropping ricin in Oxford Street.

However, for those who like that sort of thing, the humanitarian case came across strongly. Iraqis are an enterprising people "totally suppressed by a wicked, dictatorial regime with no feeling for life or human rights". 'There is no way out for Saddam in this,' Mr Blair said. That's true; and because the prestige of the West is now hung on regime change in Iraq, there's no way out for us either.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.