The forensic nature of the Iraq Enquiry appears to be coming into focus today: Jack Straw had already appeared before the panel, but now he’s back. And today’s questioning revolves around the advice given to the former Foreign Secretary by his senior legal advisor Sir Michael Wood.
Wood had told Straw that without further UN support, military action against Iraq would be a “crime of aggression”, an expression that has a less than equivocal ring to it. Straw appears to be trying to shift some of the heat on to Lord Goldsmith for not delivering his opinion on the legality of any action earlier.
Any attempt to dump or shift blame gives one impression: that there is a less than full disclosure in progress. Also noted is that the French Government confirmed that Jacques Chirac was not ruling out support for a second resolution for good, which I’ve mentioned previously.
It would be interesting to see the response from Straw to any mention of the forthright assessment of the Blair “2010 question” given by Hans Blix. This could deliver a significant increase in the Blackburn MP’s discomfort level. Chilcot and his panel will certainly be putting this to the former PM when he makes his second appearance before them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment