Baroness Thatcher has criticised Tony Blair for taking Britain to
war
in Iraq on the basis of flawed evidence about Saddam Hussein's weapons.
The former prime minister's embarrassing criticism emerged as Mr Blair
was among the 670 guests who attended a party to mark her 80th
birthday.
Although Lady Thatcher remains a strong supporter of the decision to
topple Saddam by invading Iraq, it is the first time she has questioned
the basis for the war. Yesterday's Washington Post reported that when
asked whether she would have invaded Iraq given the intelligence at the
time, Lady Thatcher replied: "I was a scientist before I was a
politician. And as a scientist I know you need facts, evidence and
proof - and then you check, recheck and check again."
She added: "The fact was that there were no facts, there was no
evidence, and there was no proof. As a politician the most serious
decision you can take is to commit your armed services to war from
which they may not return."
The article was written by the journalist Tina Brown, who said she
had been told Lady Thatcher's view by Lord Palumbo, the former chairman
of the Arts Council, who asked the former prime minister about Iraq
when he had lunch with her six months ago. Lord Palumbo was also among
the guests at last night's party at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel near
Hyde Park, London. The guest list, which was headed by the Queen and
the Duke of Edinburgh, included many former members of Lady Thatcher's
cabinets as well as prominent figures from industry, arts, showbusiness
and the media.
The Tory leader Michael Howard and the two right-wing candidates for
the leadership, David Davis and Liam Fox, were present but the two
moderates - Ken Clarke and David Cameron - had not been invited.
Lady Thatcher's office did not dispute her reported remarks but said
she had been - and remained - in full support of the decision to oust
Saddam by military means, which she always believed would be the only
way to remove him. Aides said she wished that had been achieved by the
first Gulf War, prompted by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, which took place
shortly after she was forced to resign as Prime Minister after losing
the confidence of her cabinet.
Her criticism of Mr Blair's methods comes as a surprise given her
staunch backing for the conflict. In 2002, on a visit to America, she
said she was "proud that Britain stands where we all must stand - as
America's surest and staunchest ally". She told the Heritage Foundation
in Washington: "Prime Minister Blair and I are, as is well known,
political opponents but, in this vital matter, I salute his strong,
bold leadership."
Although Mr Blair condemned Saddam's record in the build-up to the
war, he did not advocate "regime change" because that would have been
illegal. Instead, he sought to build a case on the ground that Saddam's
arsenal put him in breach of United Nations resolutions. After no
weapons of mass destruction were found after the conflict, Mr Blair
sought to justify it by arguing that the world is a better place
without Saddam in power.
The continuing problems in Iraq were highlighted when Jack Straw,
the Foreign Secretary, admitted that it could take up to 10 years to
turn the country into a stable democracy. He told BBC2's Newsnight
programme: "I am optimistic about Iraq. I think in five to 10 years we
will see it becoming stable."
An ICM survey for the programme found that 31 per cent of people
wanted British troops pulled out immediately, while 23 per cent
believed a firm date should be set for withdrawal later. Some 40 per
cent indicated they should stay until the Iraqi security forces were
ready to take over.
Mr Straw told the Cabinet yesterday that, with a referendum on the
Iraqi constitution taking place tomorrow, the political strategy for
the country was "on track". He cited higher levels of voter
registration than for the elections earlier this year.
The Foreign Secretary said that transforming a failed state into a
successful democracy would always take time. It took four years to
elect a national government in post-war Germany, but just two in Iraq.
Sir Menzies Campbell, foreign affairs spokesman for the Liberal
Democrats, said Mr Straw's remarks about a 10-year period showed that
the Government did not have a credible exit strategy. "None of this was
ever put before parliament or the British people in March 2003 when
military action commenced," he said.
Although Lady Thatcher remains a strong supporter of the decision to
topple Saddam by invading Iraq, it is the first time she has questioned
the basis for the war. Yesterday's Washington Post reported that when
asked whether she would have invaded Iraq given the intelligence at the
time, Lady Thatcher replied: "I was a scientist before I was a
politician. And as a scientist I know you need facts, evidence and
proof - and then you check, recheck and check again."
She added: "The fact was that there were no facts, there was no
evidence, and there was no proof. As a politician the most serious
decision you can take is to commit your armed services to war from
which they may not return."
The article was written by the journalist Tina Brown, who said she
had been told Lady Thatcher's view by Lord Palumbo, the former chairman
of the Arts Council, who asked the former prime minister about Iraq
when he had lunch with her six months ago. Lord Palumbo was also among
the guests at last night's party at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel near
Hyde Park, London. The guest list, which was headed by the Queen and
the Duke of Edinburgh, included many former members of Lady Thatcher's
cabinets as well as prominent figures from industry, arts, showbusiness
and the media.
The Tory leader Michael Howard and the two right-wing candidates for
the leadership, David Davis and Liam Fox, were present but the two
moderates - Ken Clarke and David Cameron - had not been invited.
Lady Thatcher's office did not dispute her reported remarks but said
she had been - and remained - in full support of the decision to oust
Saddam by military means, which she always believed would be the only
way to remove him. Aides said she wished that had been achieved by the
first Gulf War, prompted by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, which took place
shortly after she was forced to resign as Prime Minister after losing
the confidence of her cabinet.
Her criticism of Mr Blair's methods comes as a surprise given her
staunch backing for the conflict. In 2002, on a visit to America, she
said she was "proud that Britain stands where we all must stand - as
America's surest and staunchest ally". She told the Heritage Foundation
in Washington: "Prime Minister Blair and I are, as is well known,
political opponents but, in this vital matter, I salute his strong,
bold leadership."
Although Mr Blair condemned Saddam's record in the build-up to the
war, he did not advocate "regime change" because that would have been
illegal. Instead, he sought to build a case on the ground that Saddam's
arsenal put him in breach of United Nations resolutions. After no
weapons of mass destruction were found after the conflict, Mr Blair
sought to justify it by arguing that the world is a better place
without Saddam in power.
The continuing problems in Iraq were highlighted when Jack Straw,
the Foreign Secretary, admitted that it could take up to 10 years to
turn the country into a stable democracy. He told BBC2's Newsnight
programme: "I am optimistic about Iraq. I think in five to 10 years we
will see it becoming stable."
An ICM survey for the programme found that 31 per cent of people
wanted British troops pulled out immediately, while 23 per cent
believed a firm date should be set for withdrawal later. Some 40 per
cent indicated they should stay until the Iraqi security forces were
ready to take over.
Mr Straw told the Cabinet yesterday that, with a referendum on the
Iraqi constitution taking place tomorrow, the political strategy for
the country was "on track". He cited higher levels of voter
registration than for the elections earlier this year.
The Foreign Secretary said that transforming a failed state into a
successful democracy would always take time. It took four years to
elect a national government in post-war Germany, but just two in Iraq.
Sir Menzies Campbell, foreign affairs spokesman for the Liberal
Democrats, said Mr Straw's remarks about a 10-year period showed that
the Government did not have a credible exit strategy. "None of this was
ever put before parliament or the British people in March 2003 when
military action commenced," he said.