Hutton and the Search for Truth

The Hutton inquiry has barely begun, but already its basic shape is clear. The spin, revelations and dirt-slinging that have characterised the Kelly affair to date will only intensify. But for all this, Lord Hutton is serving primarily as a distraction. His inquiry does not have the scope to address the real issues, nor will it bring to task the real culprits.

Let me start by predicting the remainder of the Hutton inquiry. There will be a few surprises along the way, but the broad outlines are, I think, clear enough. Hoon is being set up as the ministerial scapegoat. He is surely aware of this, and could provide testimony that is damning of the Prime Minister. Then, Hoon will resign and Blair will not. Direct damage to Blair will be limited to the loss of his favourite advisor; revelations and accusations from journalists will be enough to force Campbell into resignation. The leaking of Dr Kelly's name will be criticised, and there will be staff at both the MOD and Number Ten who are moved sideways in an attempt to show they are being disciplined, while not actually doing so. The security of Tom Kelly's position is less clear. He was heavily involved in leaking Dr Kelly's name, and the stupid "Walter Mitty" accusation has damaged him already. The inquiry may not criticise him enough to force his resignation, but it is a possibility.

The media will, I think, be equally criticised by the report. Gilligan will no doubt be found to be an unreliable witness. His testimony yesterday will not have endeared him to Lord Hutton. Basing a major story on disjointed notes, a conveniently lost Palm Pilot and his own recollection will not impress a lawyer. Gilligan's failure to record the conversation is particularly unhelpful. So, I think Hutton will criticise Gilligan, and the BBC for placing too much faith in him. The criticism will be muted somewhat by the contrasting testimony of Susan Watts, an altogether more sober and careful reporter. Her confirmation of the much of Gilligan's report will save both him and the BBC from attracting too much ire. There will, also, be a few words for the wider media, criticising their reporting of Kelly's name, especially, I hope, that section which played such a willing part in the leak.

So Hutton's report will cause slapped wrists at the BBC, MOD, and Number Ten. Up to two Blair aides and a minister will resign. Gilligan will find his future reporting more stringently supervised. Some public servants, both in government and television, will be shuffled around to less embarrassing positions. In the end though, the inquiry is little more than a distraction. The damage that the government will sustain will be far less than the full inquiry we deserve would cause.

I know I've banged on about this before, but there are questions that need answered. While the Hutton inquiry is fascinating the media, important issues are going unaddressed. Underneath the veil of spin, leaks, and suicide, the Kelly affair is about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. It is about the lies that took us to war. That the 45 minute claim was untrue is clear enough, and the Hutton inquiry may even reveal who included that particular lie. But there are bigger lies. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. It had no programs to develop such weapons that amounted to more than wishful thinking and vague intentions. Yet we were told of the deadly threat that Iraq posed to us, to the world. Every suggestion that Iraq had such weapons was a lie.

The Hutton inquiry is not sufficient. We need to know who told us the big lie - that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. We need to know how that lie originated, who was party to the lie, and who simply too gullible to see the truth. There has been either a massive intelligence failure or a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. Neither is acceptable. We need to know which occurred, and we need to take steps to prevent such an event happening again. We need, in short, a wide-ranging judicial inquiry into the government's case for war; an inquiry with full access to the intelligence that was used as justification.

The reason we won't get such an inquiry is obvious. The war was sold to us by the Prime Minister. When Tony Blair said "Trust me" he took personal responsibility for the war. Any inquiry into the case for invasion cannot be anything other than critical, and that criticism must be directed at Blair. Whether he lied or not, whether he saw evidence he believed was compelling or not, the fact remains that there are no weapons of mass destruction, and at the very least his judgement was unacceptably poor. A full inquiry can have only one result - Tony Blair's resignation.

Time is running out for Mr Blair. On 27th November 2002, UN weapons inspectors began work in Iraq. 112 days later, on March 18th, President Bush declared America would go to war. Both Bush and Blair stated publicly that the inspections had had enough time, that only an active and cunning program of deception could have prevented the discovery of weapons. The invasion of Iraq occurred, and on May 1st was declared by the President to have been a success, the war officially over. By that point British and American forces had visited numerous sites suspected to have been connected to weapons programs and taken into custody several key Iraqis, including General Amer Hammoudi al-Saadi (Iraq's chief scientist, April 12th), Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti (a half-brother of Saddam Hussein, April 17th), Abd al-Khaliq Abd al-Ghafar (scientific research minister, April 19th), and Tariq Aziz (deputy prime minister, April 25th). The next day (May 2nd) Abdul Tawab Mullah Hwaish, minister of military industrialisation was also captured.

According to the President, America has controlled Iraq since May 1st. The search for weapons programs was already well underway by then. Since the war ended, 105 days have passed. Next Wednesday will be day number 112. And according to both Bush and Blair, that is more than enough time to discover weapons of mass destruction. Many of the key players have been in American custody for even longer, their fate largely unknown. We know that American intelligence will use whatever means are felt necessary to obtain the information they need. Guantanamo Bay inmates have been tortured to death. Or new identities and asylum could be offered, money, safety and comfort. America has had these people for up to four months, yet there is no sign of these elusive weapons.

Unless weapons are found in the next seven days, Blair will face his biggest crisis yet, one he probably cannot survive. By his own statements, the weapons should have been found by now. That they have not proves the lie that led us to war, one he took personal responsibility for. Calls for a full inquiry and Blair's resignation will soon prove irresistible.

Graham Robinson. 13th August 2003.

archives :: links :: faq :: feedback

Find out how you can support Online Opinion

Online Opinion is a trademark owned by Graham Robinson. All rights reserved. The copyright on all articles, columns, and letters on this site is owned by the original author. The copyright on all other material is owned by Graham Robinson. Permission is granted to download and store these pages for personal or research purposes only, and only as is consistent with normal viewing of web pages. All other rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely link to any page within this site, as long as ownership of the material linked to is clear. No advertisements may be associated with this site, whether explicitly or implicitly, without prior written permission.