Blair again accepted that British intelligence
pointing to stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons was flawed, but he
insisted he had been right to back the U.S.-led invasion.
"I take full responsibility and apologize for any information given in good
faith that has subsequently turned out to be wrong," Blair told the House of
Commons, in a stormy session dominated by the war.
"What I do not in any way accept is that there was any deception of anyone. I
will not apologize for removing Saddam Hussein. I will not apologize for the
conflict. I believe it was right then, is right now and essential for the wider
security of that region and world."
Eighteen months after the war began, Iraq still haunts Blair and dominates
the political debate in Britain.
He appears to be weathering the storm, however. Although Blair's popularity
slumped in the wake of the invasion, according to recent opinion polls it has
stabilized and he is considered more trustworthy than his main political
opponents.
Blair's principal reason for joining the U.S.-led offensive was his belief
that Saddam had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. The government
highlighted the danger in a September 2002 dossier as it tried to persuade a
skeptical public of the need for war.
But an official inquiry concluded in July that British intelligence on Iraqi
WMD was flawed, that the government had pushed its case to the limits of
available intelligence, and it had left out vital caveats in the dossier.
Four inquiries have cleared Blair's government of deliberately misleading the
public about the Iraqi threat, but that has failed to satisfy his political
opponents.
Opposition Conservative Party leader Michael Howard pointed out on Wednesday
that before the war, Blair said that intelligence had "established beyond doubt"
that Saddam had continued to produce chemical and biological weapons, when
evidence was patchy at best.
"I support the war. It was the right thing to do," said Howard. "But will you
realize that before you can move on, there is one matter that you must deal
with. You didn't accurately report the intelligence you received to the country.
Will you now say sorry for that?"
Blair hotly contested any suggestion he misled the country.
"I cannot bring myself to say that I misrepresented the evidence, since I do
not accept that I did," he countered.
Blair accused Howard of "playing politics" over Iraq. Like U.S. Democratic
presidential nominee John Kerry, Howard supported the war and his subsequent
attacks have opened him to charges of "flip-flopping" on the issue.
"Having supported the war, having urged us to go to war, (he) is now trying
to capitalize on anti-war sentiment to try to give himself credibility," Blair
said, to loud cheers of support from his own Labour Party lawmakers.
The Iraq Survey Group last week concluded that no WMD stockpiles existed in
Iraq on the eve of the invasion. The government was further embarrassed Tuesday
when it acknowledged that spy masters had now formally withdrawn a claim that
Saddam could launch chemical and biological weapons on 45 minutes' notice. The
claim had featured prominently in the government's dossier.
After a review of intelligence, the spy agency MI6 had ruled the source of
the claim, an Iraqi military officer in western Iraq, was unreliable. MI6 had
been directed to the source by the Iraqi National Accord, an opposition group
linked with Iraq's interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.
