Blair And A Deal Signed In Blood: PM And Bush Had Secret Plan To Topple Saddam

Blair and a deal signed in blood: PM and Bush had secret plan to topple Saddam, says envoy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...1-attacks.html

By Ian Drury
Last updated at 7:46 AM on 27th November 2009

Tony Blair and George Bush 'signed in blood' a secret deal to topple Saddam Hussein almost a year before Iraq was invaded, Britain's former U.S. ambassador suggested yesterday.

Sir Christopher Meyer said the ex-Prime Minister's stance on Iraq 'tightened' a day after the two men spent an afternoon meeting in private at the former President's family ranch in Texas.

He also told the Iraq Inquiry that officials found themselves 'scrabbling to find a smoking gun' to prove Saddam had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) while the U.S. prepared troops for the 2003 conflict.

And in an embarrassing jibe at Mr Blair, Sir Christopher said Margaret Thatcher would not have allowed herself to be handbagged by the White House in the same way.

He said she would have pledged British support only after insisting on a clear diplomatic strategy to remove Saddam and a proper plan to rebuild the nation once he was deposed.

Sir Christopher gave evidence on the third day of Sir John Chilcot's inquiry into the invasion of the desert state, which cost the lives of 179 British servicemen.

As the UK's man in Washington from 1997 to 2003, Sir Christopher was questioned about the changing nature of British and American policy towards the oil-rich country. He said that the U.S. began targeting Iraq on the very day of the September 11 terror attacks in 2001.

And he suggested that Britain appeared to be set on the road to war after a face-to-face meeting between Mr Blair and Mr Bush at the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.

The following day, Mr Blair made a speech which deliberately linked the threat from the Iraqi regime and Al Qaeda - even though British intelligence had no evidence of any connection.

Sir Christopher said: 'I took no part in any of the discussions and there was a large chunk of that time when no adviser was there.

'The two men were alone in the ranch and to this day I'm not entirely clear what degree of convergence [on Iraq policy] was signed in blood, if you like, at the Crawford ranch.

'But there are clues in the speech Tony Blair gave the next day, which was the first time he had said in public "regime change".

'He was trying to draw the lessons of 9/11 and apply them to the situation in Iraq which led - I think not inadvertently but deliberately - to a conflation of the threat posed by Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

'When I read that I thought this represents a tightening of the UK/U.S. alliance and a degree of convergence on the danger Saddam Hussein presented.'

Sir Christopher said that before 9/11, the White House viewed Iraq as a 'grumbling appendix' - a low priority for a Bush administration that was 'running out of steam'.

But there was a 'sea change' in attitude after the atrocities, with former national security adviser Condoleezza Rice targeting Iraq on the very day of the outrage.

He said: 'On 9/11 itself I had a telephone conversation and I said, "Who do you think did it?" She said, "There's no doubt it was an Al Qaeda operation".

'At the end of the conversation she said, "We're just looking at the possibility that there could be any link to Saddam Hussein".'

The U.S. administration was also 'steamed up' about the delivery of letters containing anthrax - a biological agent also used by Saddam - to a string of government departments.

By March 2002, Downing Street believed it was a 'complete waste of time' to resist U.S. plans for regime change in Iraq.

But Number 10 believed the best way to proceed was 'cleverly and with skill', by securing United Nations and international support.

Sir Christopher told the five-man inquiry panel that Mr Blair believed diplomatic pressure and the threat of force would lead to Saddam stepping down or being removed in an internal coup.

Mr Blair has been criticised for sending British troops to their deaths on a false premise - that Saddam had chemical and biological ballistic missiles, and not that he was seeking regime change.

But in a humiliating attack, Sir Christopher said Mr Blair's backing was 'taken for granted' by Washington.

Not only did the U.S. 'short-circuit' the work of UN weapons inspectors by setting an 'unforgiving' March 2003 timetable for war, it refused to move back the deadline.

Sir Christopher condemned the former Prime Minister for failing to use the goodwill he had generated in the U.S. with his uncompromising support following the September 11 attacks.

He said Mr Bush and Mr Blair had immediately struck up a good relationship when they first met in 2001. He added: 'Condoleezza Rice once said to me that the only human being [Bush] felt he could talk to was Tony, and the rest were creatures from outer space.'

But Mr Blair failed to use this ' leverage' by attaching strict conditions to Britain's military involvement, including progress on Middle East peace and a serious strategy to stop Iraq descending into chaos.

Hawkish former vice-president Dick Cheney and his officials dismissed concern about the lack of reconstruction plan by insisting it would be 'all right on the night'.

Sir Christopher added: 'I think, "What would Margaret Thatcher have done?"

'I take her name in vain - I may be hit with a thunderbolt - but I think she would have insisted on a clear, coherent diplomatic strategy, and I think she would have demanded the greatest clarity about what the heck happened if and when we remove Saddam.'