Sir Michael Boyce was Chief of Defence Staff as the British were readying for war against Iraq. He demanded an unequivocal statement from the British Attorney General Goldsmith that action against Iraq would be legal, under domestic and international law. In his original statement, the AG had been equivocal, and had stated that a second UN Security Council resolution, beyond 1441, was needed.
In the eight days that passed between the original statement by the AG (March 7) and an amended statement on March 15, the AG purged his legal declaration of doubt, and claimed military action was justified, as he had been shown evidence that Iraq was in material breach of 1441.
Blair now stands accused of having manipulated his own Attorney General, and of having brought his nation to war under false pretenses. The UK military leadership is worrying that they will now become defendants under charges of war crimes.
More under the fold.
The trouble that won't go away is returning to haunt Blair.
According to Sir Michael, now Admiral the Lord Boyce:
If the war was illegal, not only would British troops be potentially liable to face prosecution under an international war crimes tribunal but legal action could be taken against the Ministry of Defence by injured soldiers or relatives of troops killed in action.
Sir Mike Jackson, Chief of the General Staff, is on record as declaring as follows, when it came to why he wanted a clear statement from AG Goldsmith:
"I spent a good deal of time recently in the Balkans making sure [Slobodan] Milosevic was put behind bars. I have no intention of ending up in the next cell to him in the Hague."
How could Bush and Blair take such a gamble? They were simply convinced that solid evidence of Iraqi WMD would be found, thus justifying their attack on Iraq. The fact that no such evidence has been found, and that there are ample indications that the basis for the attack on Iraq was manipulated hearsay, places Blair in the hotseat.
The UK newspaper The Independent is aggressively pursuing this story, and in today's editorial they are demanding that Blair "Publish or be damned", stating that Blair must now publish the entire 13-page document produced by his Attorney General, to show that he did not manipulate his military command, Parliament and the UK electorate, through his desire to go to war against Iraq.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=623405
Yesterday and today have proved trying for Blair, as he dodges direct accusations by sending Jack Straw to parliament to field questions concerning this matter.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=623450
A secret spin unit was set up to protect the UK government, and they have been very busy, spinning the Hutton and Butler commissions, while also trying to contain the fallout from the suicide of Dr. David Kelly.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=623446
As it dawns on people in the UK that their prime minister wanted war badly enough to falsify and lie in order to get the approval of parliament, this could tip to become a huge scandal that it will be impossible for Labour to contain.
Until now, Blair has been saved by the fact that his opposition, the Tories, also wanted war against Iraq. But if they can show to falsehoods, prevarication and lies from Blair, the Tories as well as the Liberal Democrats will use this for what it is worth in the coming elections.
For those interested, here's a link to a previous diary outlining the legal contortions AG Goldsmith was forced to put himself through to create seeming justification for military action against Iraq:
Goldsmith's Contortions