Protesters call Brown 'paymaster' of Iraq war

March 05, 2010 04:31 pm | Updated November 17, 2021 07:19 am IST - LONDON

Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown, arrives at Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre in London, on Friday, to give evidence at the Iraq inquiry in London, which is investigating the circumstances surrounding British involvement in the Iraq war. Photo: AP.

Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown, arrives at Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre in London, on Friday, to give evidence at the Iraq inquiry in London, which is investigating the circumstances surrounding British involvement in the Iraq war. Photo: AP.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, defended the decision to invade Iraq, saying on Friday before an inquiry on the war that deposing Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do.

In testimony before a looming national election, Mr. Brown praised the sacrifice of those who died and immediately addressed a critical question: Did he agree with Britain’s choice of going to war?

“It was the right decision and it was for the right reasons,” he said.

Mr. Brown, who served as Treasury chief from 1997 to 2007 and approved military spending, planned to give around four hours of evidence to the five-person panel.

The inquiry on mistakes made in the war is Britain’s third and widest—ranging examination of the conflict, which triggered huge protests and left 179 British troops dead before the country’s forces withdrew from Iraq last year. The inquiry won’t apportion blame or establish liability, but will offer recommendations on how to prevent errors in future conflicts.

Earlier this year, Prime Minster Tony Blair, also stood by the decision to back the U.S. in removing Saddam because the Iraqi dictator was a threat to his region and the world.

Heckled by protesters

Mr. Brown was heckled by a small handful of protesters as he arrived for the hearing, entering through the centre’s front door.

“Gordon Brown was the paymaster for this most unpopular of wars and was the second most powerful man in the government,” said John Rees, co—founder of the Stop The War Coalition.

The British leader has faced accusations that he failed to ensure troops had adequate equipment in Iraq and Afghanistan, and has been accused of insensitivity in some of his dealings with bereaved families.

The panel is likely to question Mr. Brown on the timing of Britain’s withdrawal from Iraq last year - in particular on the decision to pull troops from the southern Iraqi city of Basra despite the prevalence of militia fighters there.

Hearings in the inquiry began in November and have seen Mr. Blair, MI6 intelligence agency chief John Sawers, the head of Britain’s military Jock Stirrup and a host of ministers and government officials offer testimony.

Mr. Brown commissioned the inquiry last year to address concerns over the case made for war, and to scrutinize mistakes made over post—conflict security and reconstruction.

Initially he planned to testify after Britain’s national election, which is expected to be held on May 6, but - under pressure from opposition lawmakers - later agreed to give evidence beforehand.

Ex-defence secretary Geoff Hoon previously told the inquiry that Mr. Brown’s decisions as Treasury chief forced the Defence Ministry to “make some rather difficult cuts.”

Gen. Michael Walker, a former head of the British armed forces, said in an earlier session that the country’s five most senior military chiefs had threatened to resign in a dispute with Mr. Brown in 2004 over funding.

In defence of Brown

However, Kevin Tebbit - a key defence official - said that while the overall defence budget was too small, Mr. Brown had not withheld resources needed for the Iraq campaign.

Mr. Lewis defended Mr. Brown’s record on military spending. “It is incontrovertible that the overall budget in that period has gone up,” he told reporters on Thursday before the hearing.

John Chilcot, head of the inquiry, has said he will seek meetings with former members of the Bush administration in the next few months.

The panel will offer recommendations by the end of the year, but won’t apportion blame or establish criminal or civil liability.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.