joed by George gallow the leader of the
respect party uh the chilot reports been
described by many as robust even damning
do you share that judgment utterly
damning and the more damning because it
came from the heart of the establishment
cluband when it was appointed I
described it as a parade of
establishment flunkies well they didn't
turn out to be flunkies but they
definitely were the establishment so I
think chilot has performed a national
service and in the nick of time the
British state was rocking after after
the brexit after the expenses scandal
after the war itself it's credibility at
an alltime low and uh I'd say give him a
Knighthood but Tony Blair already gave
him one Sir John chilko has pulled some
irons out of the fire for us he's
recovered some National Honor although
as we've just been listening to there
are some like those Japanese soldiers
that used to be found on remote Islands
uh coming out of a of a foxhole uh still
declaring their undying loyalty to the
emperor there are such people still
around and one's just been on your show
but the settled will of the people is
that chilot was right and with all the
August language and demeanor uh that he
displayed yesterday it seems to me
utterly damning and no road back do you
accept therefore that uh chilot does not
show and does not claim that Tony Blair
lied well you can only know what is in
someone's heart and mind if you're the
almighty uh the fact is whether he was a
fool or a Nave the end result was the
same and I think that it has opened up
now and I'm sure that as we speak there
are lawyers working on it opened up the
day as Joshua Rosenberg the respected
legal correspondant wrote In The
Guardian this morning uh opens up the
door for Mr Blair having to appear in
Court well what what would be the basis
of that since again chil Cott does not
opine on the issue of whether this was
an illegal War uh and perhaps does not
provide evidence that it was a legal War
either what would be the legal basis of
the war criminal charge misconduct I
don't think it would be war criminal
don't no it would be misconduct in
public office there's plenty in chilcot
to demonstrate that the use of his prime
ministerial Powers was sufficent L
Reckless and negligent as to establish a
case of misuse misconduct in public
office and I'm sure that the uh uh wives
and mothers and fathers children even of
those who fell in the British forces are
examining and exploring these very legal
Avenues right now so just to be clear
you think the war criminal route which
many on the left have talked about uh
you think that is pretty much foreclosed
but misconduct in public public office
could still be illegal route to pursue
that's right the ICC doesn't have the
power to punish uh aggressive uh War uh
even unlawful War though I've asked the
pope to punish it today uh because it's
established in chilcott that Mr Blair
waged what we call unjust War Catholic
teaching is very clear from St Thomas
aquinus on this unjust War where all
other options have not been explored
bring the pope into this yes I think uh
Catholics all over the world deserve uh
the Holy Father to opine on this but
that's perhaps a rarified uh issue only
for Catholics but the uh IC cannot
because its statutes don't allow it to
prosecute War doesn't Define what an
aggressive War would be uh what do you
make the interesting War not the war
criminal route though many will still
like that many will never be happy until
he is they for the insatiables on this
issue what do you make of the conduct
misconduct in public office well well I
I think that if proceeding on the basis
of only partial
evidence not giving the electorate or
the
media the whole story amounted to
misconduct in public office there's
hardly a prime minister that wouldn't be
guilty of misconduct in private office
what would you say to that public office
public office well of course not with
the same uh scale of cost uh I mean Ben
Bradshaw's uh statement Mr Blair's
statement that the world is safer
because of what he did doesn't even pass
the straight face test never mind any
legal test the world is INF Flames
fanatic extremism cascading everywhere
exploding everywhere even in our own
streets and uh Iraq is in pieces Syria's
in pieces Libya's in pieces the Yemen's
in pieces Saudi Arabia May soon be in
pieces the idea that the world is safer
now because of these two jokers behind
you Mr Bush and Mr Blair is so utterly
ridiculous so the costs of this
misconduct are far greater than getting
the marginal rate of income tax wrong or
or or or the dvla regulations what
though are the the foreign policy
implications because let me put a point
I put to someone else yes yesterday uh
we intervened in Iraq and we occupied
Iraq it's a mess we intervened in Libya
but we didn't occupy Libya it's a mess
we didn't intervene in Syria and we
didn't occupy Syria it's a
mess what are the form policy
implications they were afraid to repeat
the Iraq experience as would have
happened if they had occupied Libya the
people being slaughtered there now would
be our sons as well as the libyans who
are in fact being slaughtered ditto with
Syria to pray Syria in Aid of the war in
Iraq is so flying in the face of the
reality it's almost it almost leaves one
speechless alqaeda in Iraq was a
response to the invasion of Iraq alqaeda
in Iraq moved into Syria and became Isis
metamorphosed into something even worse
you you ask what are the foreign Pol
policy implications of that trilogy
you've just given us I think they are
that containment is often a better way
of dealing with dangers in the world
than trying to uh zap in and and Destroy
and remove people I well of course in in
the in the memo that was in the whatever
memo he does say we could go for
containment in that and then dis
incidentally the next word is not but as
Ben Brad just wrongly stated on your
program there is no but there are a
series of caveats as you rightly but not
to whatever them but not to the word
whatever and it isn't but so where does
Western foreign policy go from here in
the it's in a dreadful
the uh policy options that we pursued
Matthew quoting tond I did it frequently
at the time worse than a crime a blunder
it's very hard to see how we put these
pieces back together one thing ought to
be a lesson that's supporting dictators
like Saudi Arabia like Iraq before it
because the Iran War that was again
prayed inate was fought with our weapons
and our taxpayers gave uh export credit
guarantees British weapons yes British
weapons British weapons British weapons
German weapons American well remember
the super gun remember the that was
nevered that that was a that was a con
perhaps so but British British companies
British companies British arms companies
were heavily involved in supplying
Saddam Hussein with what weapons George
well I don't know which particular
caliber of gun but they were definitely
when I was in Iraq all the weapons were
Soviet yes of course the Soviet Union
supplied a lot of Iraq I'm not aware
that we supplied any actual weapons the
West supported Iraq in the Iran Ira War
uh and indeed denied halabja which is
also now predonated they denied the
halabja they blamed Iran for halabja for
six full months after it so you know the
moral authority of these people is now
gone a period of ashamed Silence from
them would now be an order all right
George Gallow thank you for being with
us