UK Helped US "Create" Iraq War

From the Sunday Times, London comes the report of a leaked government document,headed “Secret and strictly personal — UK eyes only”, which shows that Blair had already told Bush he would support aggresion against Iraq and that justification for an invasion would have to be "worked up". The papers also record details of US plans for invasion.

“If the political context were right, people would support regime change,” said Blair. He added that the key issues were “whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan space to work”.

The political strategy proved to be arguing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed such a threat that military action had to be taken. However, at the July meeting Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, said the case for war was “thin” as “Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran”.

Straw suggested they should “work up” an ultimatum about weapons inspectors that would “help with the legal justification”. Blair is recorded as saying that “it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors”.

A separate secret briefing for the meeting said Britain and America had to “create” conditions to justify a war.

The leaked papers show that Blair had already told Bush that “the UK would support US military action to bring about regime change”, even though both were saying in public at the time that no decision had yet been made. Blair has tried to play down the leak by saying it contained "nothing new" but it does - it shows clearly and unequivocally that Bush had decided to invade Iraq no matter what and that he and Blair then conspired to fabricate a pretext for the invasion. It would be Exhibit A at any impeachment or ICC trial of either of them.

In the UK, this leak comes hard on the heels of papers showing that Blair deliberately misinformed his entire cabinet and the UK military about the legality of the war.

The minutes show Goldsmith warned Blair eight months before war started on March 19, 2003 that finding legal justification would be “difficult”. The attorney-general only ruled unambiguously war was lawful a few days before the war started after Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, demanded unequivocal written confirmation.

Boyce was never shown Goldsmith’s more equivocal advice to Blair of March 7, 2003, and says today ministers failed to give him protection from prosecution at the International Criminal Court. “I have always been troubled by the ICC,” he says, adding that if British servicemen are put on trial, ministers should be “brought into the frame as well”. Asked if that should include Blair and Goldsmith, he tells The Observer: “Too bloody right.”

Now we know for sure - it was a frame up. The UK government is not denying the authenticity of the papers leaked, nor their import. Bush was going to war with Iraq no matter what and it had nothing to do with the war on terror or on Iraq being the most dangerous rogue state or on spreading democracy.

It's easy to see why Bush never wanted to agree to the ICC treaty. I wonder if the ICC could rule that it should have jurisdiction when refusual to sign the treaty is entirely designed to avoid prosecution for a head of state who may have commited criminal acts? For sure there will be no call in the US for impeachment, even if the just cause is clear.