This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/06/tony-blair-iraq-vote-syria

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Tony Blair rejects claims Iraq experience affected Syria vote Tony Blair rejects claims Iraq experience affected Syria vote
(35 minutes later)
Tony Blair has rejected the idea that a loss of public trust following his government's case for war in Iraq played a role in the decision of parliament to turn down British military action in Syria, saying that the vote among MPs diminished the country's position in the world. Tony Blair has rejected the idea that a loss of public trust following his government's case for war in Iraq played a role in the decision of parliament to reject British military action in Syria, saying the vote among MPs diminished the UK's international standing.
The former prime minister, interviewed for a BBC Radio 4 documentary on Syria, said the shadow of Iraq did play a role, but only in that the public and politicians were worried about the impact and consequences of military intervention, not whether it was justified.The former prime minister, interviewed for a BBC Radio 4 documentary on Syria, said the shadow of Iraq did play a role, but only in that the public and politicians were worried about the impact and consequences of military intervention, not whether it was justified.
Blair also made it clear that he differed strongly with Ed Miliband's stance about British involvement and the subsequent Commons vote to reject it. "I disagree with the vote, of course," he said in an excerpt from the documentary played on the Today programme. Blair made it clear that he differed strongly with Ed Miliband's stance on British involvement and the subsequent Commons vote to reject it. "I disagree with the vote, of course," he said in an excerpt from the documentary played on the Today programme on Friday.
"Britain not being part of this action, plainly, in terms of the alliance we have with the US, in terms of our position as a force in the world, is impacted by the vote. What the long-term implications of that are will depend I think on future actions. "Britain not being part of this action, plainly, in terms of the alliance we have with the US, in terms of our position as a force in the world, is impacted by the vote. What the long-term implications of that are will depend, I think, on future actions.
"I think in circumstances where there is a chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians – it's clear that attack has taken place, and it's pretty clear, frankly, who is responsible for it – not to act is, I think, dangerous. You're sending a signal that such a use of chemical weapons can take place without the international community having a robust and proper response.""I think in circumstances where there is a chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians – it's clear that attack has taken place, and it's pretty clear, frankly, who is responsible for it – not to act is, I think, dangerous. You're sending a signal that such a use of chemical weapons can take place without the international community having a robust and proper response."
Asked about whether his own actions over Iraq were partly to blame, Blair argued strongly that trust was not the factor. "There's no doubt at all that this debate on whether to act in Syria is hugely impacted and influenced by what has happened in Iraq and, to some extent, in Afghanistan.Asked about whether his own actions over Iraq were partly to blame, Blair argued strongly that trust was not the factor. "There's no doubt at all that this debate on whether to act in Syria is hugely impacted and influenced by what has happened in Iraq and, to some extent, in Afghanistan.
"The important point about this, though, is that when people talk about the shadow of Iraq lying over this debate it's not really, in this case, an issue to do with what happened before we took military action in Iraq or in Afghanistan. It's not really a trust issue, because there isn't a dispute here about the use of chemical weapons. It's an issue to do with the difficulty we encountered afterwards, and that is a really, really important lesson."The important point about this, though, is that when people talk about the shadow of Iraq lying over this debate it's not really, in this case, an issue to do with what happened before we took military action in Iraq or in Afghanistan. It's not really a trust issue, because there isn't a dispute here about the use of chemical weapons. It's an issue to do with the difficulty we encountered afterwards, and that is a really, really important lesson.
"The truth is, the reason why Iraq makes us hesitant is because Iraq showed that when you intervene in these circumstances, when you have this radical Islamist issue, both on the Shia side and on the Sunni side, you are going to face a very difficult, tough conflict. That's what distinguishes it from Kosovo."The truth is, the reason why Iraq makes us hesitant is because Iraq showed that when you intervene in these circumstances, when you have this radical Islamist issue, both on the Shia side and on the Sunni side, you are going to face a very difficult, tough conflict. That's what distinguishes it from Kosovo.
"The truth of the matter is, if we'd intervened in Iraq, got rid of Saddam and the whole thing had calmed down, we wouldn't be having this debate today." "The truth of the matter is, if we'd intervened in Iraq, got rid of Saddam [Hussein] and the whole thing had calmed down, we wouldn't be having this debate today."
Asked whether he believed that the pre-Iraq war arguments over weapons of mass destruction genuinely played no part with the Syria decision, Blair agreed. "In respect to Syria there isn't a serious doubt because we have the physical evidence of the civilians dying. That's not what's making people hesitant. What's making people hesitant is they say, if we take action in Syria will we really make the situation better? Did we not find that once we went into Iraq, things became immensely difficult?Asked whether he believed that the pre-Iraq war arguments over weapons of mass destruction genuinely played no part with the Syria decision, Blair agreed. "In respect to Syria there isn't a serious doubt because we have the physical evidence of the civilians dying. That's not what's making people hesitant. What's making people hesitant is they say, if we take action in Syria will we really make the situation better? Did we not find that once we went into Iraq, things became immensely difficult?
"My answer to that is: yes, we did find it was long and difficult, and bloody and expensive. But what I would say is, the consequences of inaction are also going to long and bloody and difficult and expensive. And worse." "My answer to that is: yes, we did find it was long and difficult, and bloody and expensive. But what I would say is, the consequences of inaction are also going to be long and bloody and difficult and expensive. And worse."
The former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix, told the programme that whatever certainty might emerge about whether the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack would not come from the UN. The former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix, told the programme that whatever certainty might emerge about whether the Syrian government carried out the chemical weapons attack would not come from the United Nations.
Of the UN inspection team which recently left Syria, he said: "I think they will be able to say with certainty whether chemical weapons have been used, and my impression from other evidence that we have is, yes, they have been used. I don't doubt there was a large-scale gas attack. But it is not in their mandate to say who used it. They will not answer that question.Of the UN inspection team which recently left Syria, he said: "I think they will be able to say with certainty whether chemical weapons have been used, and my impression from other evidence that we have is, yes, they have been used. I don't doubt there was a large-scale gas attack. But it is not in their mandate to say who used it. They will not answer that question.
"But the US, France, Germany and others may submit their evidence to the security council and have discussions about it.""But the US, France, Germany and others may submit their evidence to the security council and have discussions about it."
The former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said that Blair was wrong to say that the run-up to the Iraq war was not significant in parliament and the public's hesitancy over military strikes on Syria.
"Mr Blair's contention that public disquiet in the UK in relation to military action against Iraq can be put down to the aftermath of military action is undermined by three facts.
"First, the military action was justified on the basis that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction which were a danger to the UK, which was just plain wrong.
"Second, that the war against Saddam Hussein was illegal and contrary to the UN charter.
"Third, that the intelligence presented to parliament and public was couched in such a way as to fit our policy decision already taken wholly contrary to principle.
"The aftermath certainly didn't help public perception but it was not the only compelling reason for public disillusionment."