[A-List] UK state: Hain again

[Michael Keaney]

Little of significance here -- Greenstock renders the obvious obscure in
classical British fashion, essentially justifying the invasion of Iraq as
something done from the best of intentions, if not the best of intelligence.
I'm sure the Iraqis are relieved. Meanwhile Peter Hain publicly declares his
loyalty to the secret state, and promises to countenance no naming and
shaming of intelligence officers. That's another point for him and an
underscored black mark for "Dr" John Reid, he of the "rogue agents"
outburst, in the ongoing Blair succession stakes.

-------

War intelligence on Iraq flawed, former envoy says
CATHERINE MACLEOD, Political Editor
The Herald, July 05 2004

SIR Jeremy Greenstock, the UK's special former envoy to Iraq, admitted
yesterday the intelligence on which the US-led coalition went to war was
flawed.

Sir Jeremy is said to feel aggrieved the Foreign Office did not make the
final judgment on the intelligence about weapons of mass destruction.

Speaking on the BBC, he said: "There were different analyses. And those
making the decisions, which is Washington, chose the wrong analysis. They
were influenced by Ahmed Chalabi (a prominent Iraqi exile), who wanted the
thing to happen, and wanted to make it seem more easy.

"But there were papers in the American system, there were papers in the
British system, pointing out how difficult this was going to be. And we were
also surprised by the shortness of the war, which left elements with their
weapons . . . some of whom were inclined to go into a resistance," he added.

Sir Jeremy was thought to be making a pre-emptive strike on behalf of the
Foreign Office before Lord Butler's inquiry into intelligence reports next
week. But, in what will no doubt be heard with relief in Downing Street, Sir
Jeremy, insisted that it was Saddam's intention to create stockpiles of WMD.

He said: "There is no doubt that the stockpiles that we feared might be
there are not there. We didn't know they were there, but we thought that
there was a considerable danger that they were there, because the
intelligence, not just in the American and British systems but in the
French, German and Russian systems also was quite compelling at the time.

"So the decisions taken, from the intelligence at the time, were very
understandable.

"The reason for doing this, through the UN resolutions and from intelligence
assessment, were actually quite compelling. We were wrong on the stockpiles,
we were right about the intention."

Speculation that British intelligence sources were braced for severe
criticism heightened yesterday when Peter Hain, the leader of the Commons,
warned against a witch-hunt in the wake of the publication.

Speaking on GMTV, Mr Hain, accepted that mistakes may have been made and
lessons would have to be learned but he insisted that services' record was
generally very good.

He said: "I think the secret intelligence service MI6 and the domestic
security service MI5 do a fantastic job for us.

"That is not to say that they do not make mistakes from time to time any
more than government ministers like me or like the prime minister.

"But overall they do a fantastic job so I am saying in advance that this
government will not be party to any kind of witch-hunt against anybody."

The Liberal Democrats, who boycotted the inquiry because of its
concentration on spies not politicians, said the expected conclusions would
not be a surprise.

Sir Menzies Campbell, the LibDems foreign affairs spokes-man, said: "The
fundamental issue remains what did ministers know and when?"