The defining calamity of the post-cold war era', in Peter Oborne's words, took place in 2003. The invasion of Iraq led to the collapse of the state system in the Middle East. Iraq is shattered, Syria will never be put back together again, and Lebanon hasn't functioned as a unified state for a long time. And the great wave of refugees unleashed by this breakdown is threatening what is left of democracy in Turkey and the very existence of the European Union. Oborne provides a forensic examination of the way evidence was doctored and the law manipulated in 2002 and 2003 in order to justify a war for regime change. The government bent facts to fit its determination to join the US invasion, Parliament failed to scrutinise evidence, the intelligence service was perverted, and the media lost its head. This is a masterly account of the making of a disaster, written by a passionate British democrat.
Shows that Tony Blair outright lied to Parliament on at least one occasion and repeatedly deceived Parliament by distortion or omission, that several of his inner circle aided him in this, that his presidential style of government bypassed essential checks and balances, that he was fixated on regime change and prepared to try to game the U.N. Security Council to achieve it, that intelligence services allowed their work to be misrepresented in Parliament and the media, that Parliament and journalists were slipshod in not holding Blair and his circle to account at the time, and that Parliamentary committees of inquiry failed to do so subsequently. It also asserts that these lessons have yet to be learnt. Chilcot is published on 6 July. Get ready for fireworks.
An excellent and succinct summary of the calamity of the Iraq war. Oborne does a fantastic job of laying bare the evidence behind the lies and connecting the dots that the Chilcot inquiry didn't want to join. The book is spread thin somewhat, but it is understandable and acceptable. Would highly recommend.
[review written before the Chilcot report came out - in the event it was much stronger than Oborne anticipated]
In Not the Chilcot Report, Peter Oborne gives a succinct and passionate analysis of the evidence presented to the Chilcot Inquiry, which is now expected to report in July. His findings won't surprise anyonewho has kept their eyes open. Tony Blair and his government lied about what intelligence reports said about the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (my former colleague Carne Ross is quoted at length). Published intelligence dossiers were manipulated to support the case for war, which legally was pretty much non-existent. I slightly differ from Oborne on the flexibility of the French position immediately pre-war - my recollection of a conversation with a senior French diplomat at the time is that Chirac seemed pretty rigid. But otherwise it seems pretty sound to me.
Oborne makes several further interesting points which I don't think I'd seen before. He asserts that the British army basically got its ass kicked in both Basra and Helmand, Afghanistan, for the sake of helping the Americans who as it turned out didn't really want to be helped; that MI5 accurately foresaw that one inevitable result of war in Iraq would be increased homegrown Islamic radicalisation; and that although Blair is probably guilty of war crimes for waging a war of aggression, the fact is that the UK's veto on the UN Security Council will ensure that he remains safe from prosecution.
He starts and finishes very gloomily. He does not expect the Chilcot report, which apparently runs to over 2 million words, to land any punches, which is why he has written his own analysis of the evidence presented to it. He sees the current UK government as fully on board with the neoconservative project (and repeating the mistakes of Iraq in Libya). Meanwhile the intelligence services have been subverted to the will of the executive, which retains and exploits the monarchical powers acquired by Britain's unwritten constitution.
What's particularly interesting is that Oborne is no leftie. He's the former chief political commentator of the Telegraph, from which post he spectacularly resigned last year, and is associate editor of the Spectator and writes a column for the Daily Mail. I'm well aware of his rabid Euroscepticism and other off-the-wall right-wing views. Yet in this book he refrains from Labour bashing - in fact he has nothing but good things to say of the Labour left-wingers who criticised the rush to war (though omits the Lib Dems who also got it right). If anything that rather strengthens the case he makes. We'll see what Chilcot has to say.
This book was easy to read and the progression of events made sense. I would like to know if there is another interpretation to the events and also how closely it agrees with the actual chilcot report. Presuming that it follows the same line then it leads me to think that Brexit now gives us the opportunity to put some honesty back into government.
Brilliant little book by one of the best British conservative journalists; Oborne demolishes a lot of the pro-war arguements about Iraq and reveals damning evidence that Blair did mislead and lie to both Parliament and the Public at the time.