Rory saying he doesn't want to be fair to the intelligence services because they "fucked up bigly" is excellent and more discourse should be like this.
Unfortunately he stops short of saying that Campbell and Blair as well as Dearlove are fully responsible. The damage that it did to British relations, our identity, economy, and subsequent geopolitics has been horrendous. Campbell’s insistence that “we had reasons” is hardly exonerating.
We forget though that there was alot of pressure coming from AUIPAC to start a war in the middle east too, especially after 9/11. Read Professor Mersheimers book on the Israel lobby. It takes alot of courage to go against the lobby because you will lose your political career. We shouldn't underestimate how much sway they hold over powerful people in the US. Best kept secret in US politics.
I can clearly remember Helen Clark saying she had seen the same intelligence, due to 5 eyes and in what you have to admit took some courage kept NZ out of Iraq. She saw the same info but drew the correct conclusion. You should interview Helen Clark and ask her how she got it right.
You cant say this podcast doesn't do tough conversations. I have a lot of respect for Alistair Campbell here, purely for the fact its the one conversation you'd expect them to avoid. They confront it head on for nearly two hours, and there is a lot to be said for that alone.
Agreed, but it is rather damning how Campbell still vehemently defends his role and actions in the atrocities. Campbell even mentions himself that he received a warning that fulfilling the duties of a spin doctor, you can easily get lost in your own opinions and forget your true values and beliefs. So at least he's self aware.
I did not expect to see this headline for their podcast. Wow. I’m glad he’s done this cause despite what people now know him for as part of this podcast, Iraq is the most central thing about him and his identity and legacy. I’m just really glad he was courageous enough to do this no matter what you think of him.
Former French president Jacques Chirac warned that this unjustified military invasion of Iraq would have disastrous consequences for the region and the world, 2 decades later we are still dealing with the repercussions terror, hatred, resentment and violence. This is the legacy of the bush - Blair era. I thank Rory very much for his impartial and truthful analysis, I find it hard to believe that Mr Campbell is still in denial even after 2 decades of this unmitigated catastrophe. Some people can’t handle the truth
What a completely ridiculous, reductive and racist thing to suggest. Not just for ignoring the rich cultural history of Iraq, but also for ignoring the legacy of foreign intervention and colonialism. Plus conflicts in the ME aren’t just a lack of liberal values or hope, they’re a combination of material political, economic and social issues. Stop listening to these two liberal clowns and read a book.
@@VillagePotemkin that is every excuse politicians make...look at Robert Mc Namara...confessed Vietnam was a false flag operation in a movie called Fog of War. But still defended his actions...millions deaf and 20 year war.
The complete lack of contrition or any admission from Alistair Campbell that he got it horribly wrong is depressing and disappointing but in no way surprising.
Well he may have supported Blair but at the end of the day it wasn’t Alastair who made the decision. Plus I doubt many of us would find it easy to make an admission of association with such a catastrophe
AC is not picking up the point Rory is trying to repeatedly make about the depth of cultural and geopolitical misunderstanding about the region and the impact of their decision-making.
Rory said I think somewhere that nobody had predicted that the invasion of Iraq would strengthen Iran. I suspect people did predict it but chose to deal with Iraq in isolation.
He does pick it up, saying that it is impractical for a P.M. of the UK to have to be able to understand all the languages in the world. I accept that point. It is up to the advisers to advise the UK P.M. effectively. In short, people like Rory…
@@Paulus8765that was predicted my many OUTSIDE of the Washington/London insiders at the time. A power vacuum could begin that would only strengthen Iran. This was waved away and in America you were called a naive dove or worse an unpatriotic wimp
The fact that these two have continued to work together for a long time after this conversation took place is testament to their characters. No matter where you sit on this debate, its a joy to see two people act like grown ups - in a world that is fragmented, populist focussed, and obsessed with the view of the general public. Bravo.
The way they don't let their massive failures that destroyed untold thousands of lives get in the way of their sense of superiority is amazing to watch
@@fwarktheyeti both of them...look at that former tories voting record. He is a ruthless as any...don't let the " nice guy, reformed character " deceive you.
@@exigency2231 The same. Why wouldn't Saddam want WMD? That's not the point; the point is that, contrary to the BS put out by Bush & Blair, he didn't have them. They said he did. They lied; Iraquis died.
Really fascinating. Just one thing not discussed. I was a Blairite at the time and supported the build up to the Iraq invasion to force Iraq's compliance with UN resolutions, until the very moment our troops crossed the border. Just before, with US and UK build up on the border, everyone's forgotten that Sadam did fully capitulate and agreed to all demands to allow full inspections. I thought, naively, wow its worked! No need for war now. But we still invaded anyway, to my horror, and at that moment my support stopped as i realised it was not about WMDs at all but about a desire for war itself.
@juliangilbert5465 I for one really appreciate your honesty and your view on this. I remember this too (D'you remember Tony Benn interviewing Saddam Hussein!? It all felt so bizzarre) I must say though, for those of us who opposed it lock stock and barrel at the time, who could see the US's cassus belli for what it was...it really brings back my screaming frustration at not being listened to. I say this mainly because this is exactly how I feel about the Israel Palestine genocide right now, and the US and UK support for it. 20 years on and nothing has changed. To reiterate, because I was pretty raw there - I appreciate what you've shared and believe you when you say you were horrified.
@@tomb020780 I think I'm rare in I've been on both sides of the playing field, on a journey from originally (pretty strong) Blairite to Corbynite. The Left has consistently proven to be right on just about everything. Most people are supposed to move right as they get older - I've moved Left and the Iraq war was a large part of making that shift.
I didn't know that! Can you send me a contemporaneous news article wherein Sadam acquiesced to full inspections? I'm curious what people made of it or if there were any caveats
@@ElliotShayle One reference reporting on Saddam Hussein’s decision to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq is from BBC News on November 13, 2002. The article titled “Iraq Agrees to Weapons Inspections” details Iraq’s acceptance of U.N. Resolution 1441 and the return of inspectors.
I think the problem was that Saddam Hussein was still giving the inspectors the run around, probably because he didn't want Iran and other enemies to know that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction? Blair and Bush thought he was still hiding the WMD. I think they should've both resigned when none were found, the buck should stop with them, but they had no shame.
The desire to find WMD cost Dr David Kelly his life, whether by suicide or MI6/MI5 sculduggery. Before that, he was called a middle brow academic by a press stooge of the government, instead of an expert in his field, which he was. That was what sickened the public once they had time to consider all the ramifications. It was and looked forced.
'Part of the case for war' - what utter and unmitigated horseshit. The case for war made to the British people was that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could hit us within 45 minutes and that they were prepared to do so, necessitating a pre-emptive strike. We lived through those times and we remember. Going back to the question 'Do you understand why people are still angry about the war?' - have you ever considered that a major part of it is decades of post-hoc justifications and gaslighting the public, trying to say that this was not the case being made for the war? We will go to our graves angry about it if this is not engaged with honestly.
I agree. As I remember it, the case made to the public was entirely based on Iraq's supposed WMD capability (the "dodgy dossier"), and we were repeatedly told that regime change was not the objective. The anger, at least in my case and I suspect more widely, stemmed from a feeling that the public were being taken for fools - fed an obviously false narrative about something as serious as going to war. Honestly, regardless of whether or not toppling Sadam's regime was the right thing to do, it was this dishonesty about the motives that made me angry. If you send your armed forces to war, and want people to support that war, then AT LEAST have the decency to present a compelling and honest justification for the action.
Absolutely, they seem to forget that lots of people actually remember this. Some of us have memories than can span timescales more than the length of a tweet on X. The US wanted to go in, the US tell the UK what to do in regards foreign policy. The rest was bullshit lies, and Alistair was a key player in that.
@@williampatton7476That's a very good question, to which I don't know the answer. Unpicking all of the various western interests and agendas that might have been served by removing Saddam Hussein's regime would require a far deeper knowledge of foreign policy and Middle Eastern affairs than I possess. The idea, mentioned by Mr. Campbell, that it might have set in motion a chain reaction of uprisings and democratic government across the region is interesting - if very naive. That might have been a consideration but, sadly, I suspect that the real motivations were less altruistic.
Thank you gentlemen for this exceptional episode. It has put to bed a lot of the reticences I had when Alastair was commenting on the Middle East in previous episodes. It is immensely useful to hear all sides of History.
Thank you for doing this episode. It can't have been easy on a personal level. You are both stand up people and a testament on how to be polite and discuss this with courtesy and civility. Thank you again both of you.
Sadly the misinformation came from the US and UK governments. Saddam Hussein was a monster who killed 250 000 over 20 years. America and Britain 's invasion led to the death of 1 million people in less than 2 years. Why did they do it. Look at New American century the extreme republican playbook . This advocated the regime change and predates the war by years. The motivation was not WMD. It was control of oil and political domination of the Middle East.
He hammers the same talking points interview after interview. He seems to think that - because one report with misinformation in it is often confused with another report with misinformation in it - he is misunderstood. He's a very shallow, shallow man.
Its actually very simple. Hindsight actually gives clarity and not the other way around as you suggest. Allister Campbell is a spin doctor and trying to vindicate his role in Iraq. I wouldn't be so gullible. Fog of 9/11 made the western world emotional and hungry for revenge. This laid the fertile groud for war. The neocons wanted to sells us a narrative of a great war that we had to fight. It was so persuasive that only a single American senator voted against the Iraq war in the senate. To go against the tide would of been career suicide. American neocons wanted to go into Iraq even though it did not make sense. We (the British) had to follow them due to our relationship and weak leadership. Despite countries like France abstaining. Weapons of mass destruction was a later addition. It was semantical spin at it's finest. Neocons wanted to invade Iraq because it was an oil rich country that was not under the yolk of America (rightly or wrongly). War mongers (e.g. Dick Chaney) are the ones who spread misinformation. See Israel as exhibit A or Saudi Arabia as exhibit B.
I enjoy the rest is politics, but I am so angry about the Iraq war that sometimes I find it hard to listen to Alistair. I was one of the million that went to the protest against the Iraq war in London and was devastated when we went ahead with the war. Hundreds of thousands died. I look forward to listening to this, but it may be the end of me listening to this podcast.
Me too. I was just a schoolkid at the time but I remember being so infuriated over the transparent propaganda being given to us to justify the war, that myself and two friends travelled over 3 hours on a bus to attend the protest in Scotland. It was the first time I ever travelled outside my city without family.
Like many, I am disappointed to hear Alistair Campbell still defending the indefensible. What I am waiting for is what John Pilger claimed at the outset of this whole conflict "It is all about oil". The only politician to come out of it with any credit was Colin Powell who had courage to admit that he had made a mistake.
I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum, but it's good to talk about it like this so many years later. Despite all the failures and atrocities, which someone should absolutely be held to account for, leaving Saddam in power would have been absolutely devastating for the region and wider world. Think back to the now decade long civil war in Syria, with all its massacres, refugees, terrorism etc.; but Assad is a kitten compared to Saddam Hussein. He was not just capable, but willing to gas his own people by the hundreds of thousands,, engage in large-scale conventional warfare and annex other countries. He committed or played a major role in numerous terrorist attacks abroad. Remember Abu Ghraib? That place had human ears nailed to its walls when it was liberated (the mistake was not blowing it up). There is no doubt in my mind that hundreds of thousands would die either way, invasion or not. Also, if you're a political leader after 9/11 and your intelligence services claim that WMD will be given to terrorists next, not acting on that would be criminally negligent.
I'd encourage everyone watching this video to do their own research and not let AC and others try and obfuscate the facts by saying "well at that moment in time..." AC was Blair's professional spin doctor and he will never stop spinning tales on Iraq. It's all he knows.
@@hithere981read the wiki pages on the war, and the bbc and sky broadcasts to get a sense of the media environment at the time, i dont think thats too biased
@@hithere981 what do you mean write them off? He lied to sell a catastrophic war to the public and deserves some prison time because of that, doesn’t mean i cant enjoy his podcast
General Wesley Clark has said many times that the Bush administration entered office in January 2001 planning to invade Iraq. He said he knew staff officers in the Pentagon who were working on the plans before 9/11.
One of the reasons why Campbell was such an effective member of Blair's team is that he seems to genuinely 100% believe his own spin; the spin that helped to legitimise Blair's bs. And he hasn't changed. He can't. I don't think there are many people that could comprehend and accept the consequences of their own actions when they are so impactful and significant and wrong.
I find it absolutely amazing that you bring up Sadam Husain's record when he was supported by the West throughout the 1980s when he was fighting Iran and gassing his own people !! Not to mention the fact that the UK was trying to sell him a 'super gun' (having already supplied his regime with weapons) on the eve of the fiest Gulf War. But to listen to Alistair butter woildnt melt. It is this fundamental lack of honesty that makes people ro angry about this to this day.
AC sounds completely dillusional and arrogant, and his justification, "what if the (WMD) had been found and they were used" is extraordinary. Essentially what he's saying is the annihilation of a million innocent Iraqi people and the disintegration of Iraq and the region since this catastrophic error was entirely acceptable as dead, innocent Iraqis are more acceptable collateral damage. How utterly unforgivable to have traded your lies for their lives, and to continue the spin all these years later. To then go on and dismiss Rory's entirely reasonable point that neither the decision maker (Blair) nor his spindoctor (Campbell) should be expected to have any real or indepth knowledge of the middle east at the time (and apparently still don't) shows a level of arrogance and ego that is far more dangerous to humanity than hypothetical WMDs. Further, Blair jumping on the Bush bandwagon to try to link Iraq to September 11th and Al Qaeda also demonstrates their ignorance of the region and willingness take these decisions regardless of being entirely uneducated about the makeup of the Middle East....not a single hijacker on 9/11 was iraqi (or afghani for that matter), the majority were Saudi. Tony preferred to lie about the al qaeda link to Iraq (there was none) than question why the Americans (who supported sadam in the 80s against Iran and encouraged his invasion of Kuwait) did not spend a minute looking at countries with actual links like Saudi? Sadam Hussein was a horrible man but the UK and the US are friends with far, far worse and dont invade and slaughter their people in this way. I am forever in awe of Rory Stewart: his intelligence, depth of knowledge, grace when dealing with ignorance. He is exceptional.
The UK didn't try to sell Iraq a "Super Gun", that was a domestic Iraqi programme led by the Canadian Artillery designer Gerald Bull. The Iraqis did buy sections of steel high pressure pipe from a UK manufacturer stating they were for Oil/Gas pipelines rather then a Super Gun. The pipe was intercepted by customs and confiscated as breaking then existing sanctions against Iraq.
This podcast, one of your finest and most earnest exchanges, is a testament to your commitment to learning and growth. Your ability to disagree agreeably, share honest recollections, and offer stern rebuttals while always being willing to then consider each other’s experiences is truly inspiring. We have all learnt from the light of experience in the case of this war, and its legacy will preoccupy our universal consciousness. To you both, your integrity has not only survived beyond this war but has also contributed to our collective learning. With its insightful discussions, your podcast continues to be a valuable source of learning for all. Well done, guys.
Thank you once again Alistair and Rory for this deep dive. This long format discussion is such an impressive example of why your podcast is so globally respected by every day people. Your close personal insights expand on this moment in history as an afterword not only for Great Britain but also the other allies of the west from that time; for myself as an Australian watching this all unfold in my early 20s is almost cathartic to help compartmentalize my country’s role in this war as well. Specifically with regards to Richard Butler who was chairman of UNSCOM and who was literally an Australian household name during the lead up to the invasion of Iraq due to his major role in “identifying” WMDs in Iraq at that time. Thank you for both opening up on your own personal perspectives and challenging each other on this incredibly controversial moment in modern history to help everyday laymen potentially come to either some kind of solace or at least have clarity that was never offered through traditional media at the time. Profound stuff.
I think if you watched the entire video and don’t understand their perspective, then you lack a degree of empathy and understanding. You can see the intelligence reports and Blair truly felt the need to prioritise our security
In denial about what exactly? Be great if you could add some clarity. Do you believe he is in denial about whether he did or didn't deceive the public, or denial about the failure or otherwise to challenge the 'intelligence' at the time adequately, or in denial about whether despite all the information to hand, Tony made the right decision? I'm not arguing with you, I'm just wondering what exactly you believe he is in denial about, because people have differing opinions about that. Some people are convinced that even with the information they had to hand, they made the wrong decision to stick with the Americans, and they believe that if the Americans had been left to go in alone things would have been different for the region, that the absence of the UK forces would have somehow led to fewer deaths and that our relationship with the US would have been unharmed. Others are sure that all the enquiries were hoaxes and that Tony knew all all along that there weren't WMDs and that the intelligence community was persuaded somehow, en masse, to lie to the courts about the evidence they gave Tony at the time about what was 'known' at that time. I'd love to know if you know some people in the intelligence community, and perhaps you consider them all to be so weak-willed and willing to fall on their swords, because the evidence they gave made them look pretty terrible. Just interested to know what exactly you consider him to be in denial about?
I am grateful for this conversation. It was a brave thing to do, and there are obvious differences of opinion between you, but I love the dynamic of the podcast as you deal with them. It's an invitation to all the haters to fill the thread with insults and well rehearsed one liners, but I hope there will be many who will have appreciated your insights and memories of your experience of those tragic events as insiders. Historians have got their work cut out to unravel the issues for decades to come. I feel more enlightened. Thank you.
My loathing for the majority of British politicians started with Blair and Campbell. They took our country in to war on a lie. That's the worst betrayal I can imagine.
The issue seems to be that they were regurgitating bad Intel without adequate caveats. They believed the rumours as fact, and therefore misled the public into supporting an invasion. So it wasn't a lie, just bad governance.
I was very reluctant to watch TRIP because of Campbell/Iraq. I still think that Iraq is the biggest disaster/catalyst for the disintegration of the middle east, British standing, political trust, world order, and Isis etc. My skin crawls whenever AC tries to weasel out, and makes me want to quit the pod, I'm thankful for Rory at least putting the case forward with authority/knowledge/conviction, especially considering even Rory's position could have labelled you an unpatriotic loon a couple decades ago, and at least we are beginning to have this conversation. I have very little sympathy for AC, but I can see/imagine the psychological defense mechanisms he must have put up to justify to himself what he did (though I have absolutely zero time for Blair).
I knew none of this-I came to the pod for Rory having read The Places In Between. I’d gathered that he worked for Blair but wow, he has a lot to feel bad about even if he doesn’t openly. Rory was wonderful.
I get why Rory feels like he does about the catastrophe that unfolded after the successful toppling of the Iraqi government. I’m happy to accept Alastair’s account, unlike many others, but what I find so difficult to understand is why were the Americans and the Brits so naive over the natural anger and resentment of the Shia having been so brutally repressed for so long. The consequences of not grasping that most obvious of outcomes is where I condemn both Tony Blair and George Bush. The results speak for themselves in the internecine fighting between Sunni and Shia, the destruction of the ancient Christian community and the persecution of all the other religious communities in Iraq. It seems to me a no brainer that Shia Iran was bound to jump in and cause chaos and quite honestly you wouldn’t have had to be a savant to imagine that resulting in a group like ISIS. This isn’t 20 20 vision; this is simply a basic understanding of history. In a way, you can understand the Americans being dumb….but Blair should have given thought to the consequences…..when you knock the lid off a powder keg you first game-plan how to manage the after effects. Having said all that you can understand the effect on the American psyche of having highjacked planes full of passengers being flown into office blocks in New York and the Pentagon. Just imagine the trauma if that had happened in London or Birmingham or Edinburgh.
All very true. Just shows you why we shouldn't listen to religious head cases of any persuasion. Islamophobia? Don't make me laugh - they hate each other just as much as Yaxley-Lennon hates them. Antisemitism? Netanyahu would applaud Hamas wiping out Jews he thought opposed him. Christianity? More schisms that the global anti-capitalist left and it still doesn't stop them killing each other in the name of God. Buddhists killed how many Hindus in Sri Lanka? How many Muslims have Hindus killed in India?
What happened is Iraq was exactly what the US wanted to happen, a quick regime change wouldn't have maintained delivered western control over the oil fields. Also they have to send a message to any other country that dared to speak of selling oil in anything other than US Dollars.
When I tell people I watch the Rest Is Politics with Alistair Campbell they often react with “that monster?” and at first I didn’t fully get it. After watching this episode however, I now do. You do get a sense that he thinks he can brutishly plow through his own interpretation of events: “the intelligence we were given was at fault”…but then later “I do think we should go lightly on the head of MI6 at the time” (paraphrase)… or the fact he admits “how difficult it was to gather information at the time” but then how they nevertheless decided to commit the lives of thousands of service(wo)men and Iraqi citizens on said intelligence. All this mixed with his unearned air of irritability and abrasiveness about being asked why and how he screwed up makes for a pretty tough watch. Imagine working for this man as an intern when you know he’s wrong on something and needing to inform/convince him of it when he thinks he’s right - ask yourself, how would this man react? This vid gives a pretty good idea. Kudos to Rory for asking some great questions though. In the end it’s all just very tragic. A declining country holding on (under hubristic leadership) for foreign policy relevancy at the behest of a few very dubious individuals pulling the strings in US politics (whom Alistair also seems to go lightly on btw…)
The destruction of an entire people is truly devastating. Many fail to grasp the complexities of power in the Middle East. A Syrian friend of mine, now a refugee in Australia, believes the region isn’t ready for democracy due to the influence of extremist groups within Islam, which we saw firsthand in Syria. For now, secular dictatorships seem to provide the most stability. While democracy could be possible in the future, the region simply isn’t ready yet. Many Iraqis have even said that life was better under Saddam, with stability, no hyperinflation, reliable access to basic services like water and without US companies exploiting their resources. Unfortunately, this important context is often ignored in favour of a Western-centric perspective. Stop being so naive, Alistair. Iraq was an easy target for the US after 9/11-to appear in control, sell weapons, allow US-backed companies to dominate key Iraqi industries and strengthen their regional influence. I believe Blair knew this, kissed the emperor’s ring, and you Alistair, played a key role in selling it to the British public. Your denial and defense of Blair, (a war criminal), is pathetic.
Mr Campbell is unbearable. A generous interpretation of Campbells utterances here would be that the war was justifiable on the basis that it was strategic because of Saddam's long-term ambition to have WMDs, and further how evil Saddam was and his track record of using chemical weapons. That may well be true. However, that was not the message we, the public got. We were told Iraq represented an imminent danger to the UK and the West. And in my opinion they knew they could not get the support from the public based upon the long-term argument alone, so they ‘upped’ the part of their assessment that referred to the imminent threat to make it centre stage. IMO they mislead us at best. You can also accuse them, Campbell and Blair, of being utterly incompetent in making key assessments, about many things such as the ‘need’ for the sake of the special relationship to go to war alongside the US, not assuring themselves that there was an adequate post invasion plan, and the bullshit about creating a domino effect of a functioning democracy in the Middle East, and not asking the hard questions about the security assessments, and failing to realize that Iran would be the big winner of the conflict The story of how the attorney general came to change his mind is utterly unconvincing. The AG had, for sure, seen all details of all resolutions before he rendered his first opinion. There is no way he found out about the prior resolutions and /or newly understood that the case could be made that no new resolution was needed during a trip to the US. FFS. A top lawyer making one of the most difficult and important decisions since 1956. He’d read everything on the topic, and I mean everything. Top to bottom. A whole team of advisers doing research for him on each resolution etc etc . All giving him input. The AG knew every angle and argument. AC and TB are both very clever men, and they know, and knew, how to manipulate things. I should image it’s hard to get that high in government without those skills. But they were absolute masters of their trade. IMO he and Blair made their mind up and lent on the AG to change his opinion. In my opinion Campbell is a war criminal. and he knew that the best analysis was that the war was illegal and a new explicit UN resolution was required. His defence that we don’t know the counter factual is of course logically correct but that argument can be used to justify absolutely anything. On that basis you can say how do we know the world would not have been better had we not had ……..(insert your genocide of choice…) ? His and Blair’s decisions were utterly utterly appalling. Both in terms of their judgements strategically and morally. IMO war criminals the pair and the whole episode is a stain on Britain. It makes me wonder why anybody would give credence to what this man says on any topic given the glasses he wears don’t avail him of the truth on this topic. He is, IMO, an out and out liar, and a master of the half truth. Sadly, many lies have been lost in consequence of this war and much damage to the function of the UN and Western interests.
@@sharpvidtube I don't either but his ardent defense and doubling down on the issue doesn't do him any favours. This was tragic, all round, and we should expect more from public figures, especially the right hand man of TB.
I grew up hating Tony and new Labour over the war. This was more my parents than my own view. Now as an adult I can empathise with the incredibly hard positions you both found yourselves in. I hear a little of Hitchens in Alistairs comments, I suspect the crime here is that we let Saddam go on for as long as he did. I did security work with an Afghani chap not too long ago, which helped put the horrors of these conflicts into perspective for me. Thank you both for your efforts
Alastair struggles to fully accept the accountability required because it would mean acknowledging the consequences of his time in government and close relationship with Blair, including the lives lost. It's difficult to reconcile how many people are no longer here while he continues to speak and write books. I like the man, but if he truly took responsibility, you'd have to question why anyone involved isn't in jail.
@m.c4210 I'm not sure I agree with you. Maybe you are more aware of the nuances of Alistairs actions and his individual power to effect change. We can't really argue about toppling Saddam, he was a genocidal maniac. The real question is how an ill considered approach to democratising was conceived and then implemented over solutions more relevant to Iraqi culture. It is suggested in the discussion that the US military leadership were mostly responsible, for what turned out to be a diplomatically blind and dogmatic approach. Can you think of anything specific that he should take accountability for? It seems to me that he was a cog in a fucked up engine that would have run with or without him. I appreciate your civility here, I look forward to your input :)
How old are you revolution? I was 23 when 9/11 happened. Then the US went off in a complete tangent after failing to find Bin Laden and everybody knew it was a massive farce linking Sadam Hussein to Bin Laden, terrorism and WMD. It was a complete absurd Gulf of Tonkin moment and it was mocked of how ridiculous it was. It’s why 1 million people went on a march to protest it. The thing you can’t do Revolution is sit there and think this is a hypothetical game of poker. Eg; Does sadam have WMD or doesn’t he? Because the answer to that is always easy and you are gonna take his toys off him. But back in the day when the yanks were off in Afghanistan and looking for Bin Laden whilst we all waited for justice…..they did a complete 360 and decided to do Iraq. It was bizarre times. And the obvious lies told ricocheted into nowadays events. Truth has evaporated.
The threat was very clearly nonsense. I was around 30 at the time, I remember it all very well, crystal clear. The intelligence community were providing excuses and dodgy evidence for the politicians, who were lapping it up to the astonishment of anyone with a brain. In my recollection, the discussions around Iraq invasion in early 2003 (before it happened) were like trying to reason with a Brexiter.
Robin Cook’s resignation speech was the highwater mark of British politics. Respectfully resigned, made a key point on WMD which as he was in cabinet undermines the post invasion wmd spin.
I did try to post a link to a recording of his speech (twice), but for some reason it was deleted (twice). Definitely worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it.
I'm from Turkiye and Middle East affairs interest me much. Listened with amazement at the elegance and the tact RS showed to AC. I could not have. I have always hated Blair and the lot for the massive muck-up. What really stuns me is the fact that AC can be out and about, walking, 'swimming' at his local pool, co-presenting a podcast, living a normal life. Is it possible to have a normal life after being even the tiniest part of such a disaster that caused the deaths of so many innocent people? How can you? How is it possible? Wow!
A fascinating and very important piece to put out. Voices from behind the curtain and from on the ground at the time. Very nicely done. I love a good honourable debate aswell! Thank you guys!
Well, I have actually been to Iraq regularly, and I can tell you after Saddam, it's much better. Whether or not you think the war was good, and almost none think it was, but the fact is, it is better. And Iraq has had a huge influx of repatriates since 2003, you don't need to believe me, check it online. Huge numbers of civilians did not need to die, and it was mismanaged on a scale that is amazing, but don't say that its worse now than it was before.
@@alroeccIraq use to be a place people went to for university, very open a lot of history particularly in the Islamic world. Holiday central etc. not anymore. Along with a slew of other things. It will never be the same
It was a bad idea with made up reasons. Operation Iraqi Liberation or OIL was unecessary and both a strategic misstake plus badly excuted (the old "we will be praised as liberators and then it will get good for all" did not happen).
@@PMMagro Badly executed, but mass amnesia about (almost) all Iraqis celebrating... The Ba'athist Saddam murderers were left with all the weapons - which screwed things up. THEY did all the deliberate killings as revenge. NO benefit for the allies to simply kill innocent people, as some stupidly suggest.
@@alroecc I imagine it depends to an extent on where you look in Iraq. My understanding is that the quality of life in Iraq remains difficult for many ordinary folk. While there have been improvements in security and efforts to restore infrastructure, problems like unreliable electricity, inadequate healthcare, water shortages, unemployment and widespread corruption persist. There's more stability and better services in areas like Kurdistan, while war-damaged regions like Mosul and parts of Anbar remain severely underdeveloped. Despite Iraq's oil wealth, the benefits have not translated into improved living conditions for the majority of the population, leaving many Iraqis frustrated with their government and struggling with basic needs. Is that a fair assessment?
I was anti war and went on the march. My views on Alistair have softened through listening to this podcast week after week. I feel now not persuaded of the case for the war but much more sympathetic to the position of those who made the decision to go. I also think I have a better understanding of the complexity of the choice as a result of listening to this. The best laid plans of mice and men .....
Glad you feel softened, but….most of us knew it was wrong, and so it turned out to be. AC won’t find peace of mind until he sees that we had / have absolutely no business interfering so far from home.
@@lakedistrict9450 As someone who was against the war this is revisionist. Popular opinion at the time supported the war. Around 50% in favour and I think 35% against.
@@davidcjupp I didn’t know anyone for the war at the time. Where do you get the data from? In any event, if you are right, it shows how easily opinion can be nudged ?
a total unmitigated disaster, huge loss of innocent life, and service men and women. The ramifications of the intervention live with us today with a more polarised world, and reduced UN.
@@dh1380 Interestingly yes, and I think that's largely due to the goals for each operation. Desert Storm had the clear and achievable goals of restoring Kuwaiti sovereignty and destroying the Iraqi military, both of which were achieved in quick and spectacular fashion. In contrast Iraqi Freedom had nebulous and delusional goals based on the assumption that we could somehow nation build a fairly alien culture into a modern western democracy.
@@judithdavidson2356 It certainly explains the decline of the public image of western democracy, something that he Russian propaganda machine takes full advantage of.
Campbell's responses to the questions are pure special pleading. Basically, they bolloxed it up and hid behind the skirts of Uncle Sam. It's that simple.
It brilliant. Alastair is in total denial and still believes it was the right thing to do. Quite incredible. But the reflection on the two lists is so brilliant. Am fantastic episode.
Thank you both for this frank discussion. It is interesting to me to see Alistair's reaction to the very last topic. I too was able to watch this episode with calmness and interest in hearing the discussion, but as soon as I realised that Rory was going to refer to the awful event of Dr Kelly's death, I broke down. The invasion of Iraq caused me to becone ashamed to be British, and I found myself totally lost. I returned to the church after a gap of about 40 years to try to find help to make sense of it all. I think one of the legacies of the Iraq War which wasnt really touched on in this excellent podcast was the effect it had on the population of this country in terms of the relationship between the electorate, and politicians. Although recent events have damaged the trust and respect which ought to co-exist, I believe that for many people, that breakdown started back then. I understand the convictions that Alistair described, but those very opinions obscured the wider issues that needed to be considered, and blinded the decision makers.
I was in elementary school when 9/11 happened, and now that I’m a lot more politically aware, it’s absolutely fascinating to hear about the thought process about the response to that event. I appreciate your openness and candor about it. Thank you.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. People planning iraq takeover said public woukd not go along and needed a pearl harbor type event. Document s project for New Anerican Century. Clinton said no and bush said yes. Iraq was being planned early in bush admin. N
Thank you so much for this episode. Fascinating. I was and still am against the Iraq war. I appreciate your openness in this episode and respect Alistair. I understand the dilemma the prime minister must've been in. Now, I feel a lot of the terrorist threats we have are a result of this war. Who are we in the west to push our 'democratic' methods on other cultures. We in the west have a lot to answer for, why we always have to follow the US is beyond me. There were war crimes committed that have not been brought to trial. Double standards. Rory, I can't imagine how difficult it would've been to be plonked into southern Iraq at this time. I admire how much respect you have for other cultures.
45:10 when you consider the amount of lives at stake and even in a self-serving way, the political careers on the line, the fact that nobody said "show me the hard, indisputable evidence" before all these lives are lost is unbelievable and makes it look like Blair and Bush were looking for an excuse to remove a tyrant and hopefully lead to the democratisation of the Middle East that was touched on earlier in the podcast. It'd actually be much easier to take if that's what people involved would admit. It's awful that Alistair takes all the flack for something he didn't make the final decision on because he's still out here talking.
They absolutely definitely knew everything about the tribal nature of Iraqui society. Makes you wonder what the REAL reason for invading Iraq was. Just ask who benefitted most.
Campbell gets angry at the criticism of the 'Intelligence ' people (who were under pressure to tell Blair what he wanted to hear) His complete lack of remorse is shameful,he has no right to be angry.What about the real, deep, visceral anger of the parents of these young soldiers slaughtered needlessly .
Brilliant discussion as always, thankyou to Rory for pushing Alistair where he needed to be pushed. The intelligence this war was predated on was all wrong, and it was known to be wrong.
As a psychologist, I remember thinking that Saddam's ego motivated him to act as if he had WMD when he did not. It was so counter intuitive that the possibility not a bluff was taking place could not be risked. Thank you for your thoughtful discussion.
This is literally stupid. The U.S was threating invasion with the overthrowing of his regime. It's more than ego it's absolute lunacy, which we can see in hindsight but at the time the Akum's Razor explanation was that he was obfuscating because he had something to hide. People blame the U.S leadership but not enough blame gets put on Saddam who could of let the inspectors in without restrict earlier and not wait until the point of no return.
Tony Blair's biggest issue was and is that he has enormous belief in his own expertise. Even when he has a very limited experience. Even after this enormous cluster... he ended up as some kind of special consultant for the middle east. When it comes down to it, Blair was and is a western democracy hawk. He's still making the same expertise errors around Israel now.
Gents I greatly appreciate you both and this difficult discussion. I believe we're still yet to have a proper and essential "air crash investigation" but the insights you've given have helped me to better understand what happened. Thank you.
As a 28 year old, the endless nuances of the politics and paranoia prior to the Iraq war are still a confusing mystery to me (no matter how much I read about it). That said, I did feel Alastair's sincerity, and Rory did really make good points, especially with regards to the intelligence services' failings. I don't think the real problem was the fact we went to war in Iraq. I think deposing Sadam Hussein was a worthy goal. I think the problem is that we did it badly. There was such poor planning for post invasion Iraq that we ended up with a nebulous, unclear mission leading to the unwinnable forever war...
As an aging 43 year old millennial, I lived through that entire period as an adult and watched it all unfold, going from bad to worse, to disastrous, to unbearable. The definite problem was the war in Iraq. Deposing Saddam may seem a worthy goal but regime change alone is unlawful as a pretext for war, that's why the focus at the time was all on WMD as Saddam having them was necessary to provide a legal justification for a pre-emptive invasion. When it became clear that the WMD were imaginary, the entire reason for the conflict went up in smoke. So now, the ones responsible for selling the war to the public (like AC) fall back on the "Saddam was a bad man" defence because that is all they have left. The war in Iraq was completely unnecessary, unjustifiable from a legal context, led to the complete destruction of Iraq civil society - so much so that it even spawned a new term, socioicide. It also diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan and directly led to the creation of Isis and an increase in radical Islam across the West. We are still living with the consequences of that conflict and they are all bad. And what's more, even at the time the public were against it! One and a half million people marched in London against the war in 2003, the single largest demonstration in British history. And the Blair government just closed the curtains and went to war anyway. Many people, including myself, began to lose their faith in politicians and politics at that time, and it has never recovered. As for Campbell, I wonder if he truly believes the defence he keeps trotting out, and if it is enough to silence the ghosts of the *half million* corpses their war produced. I hope they continue to haunt him.
@@robbieshand6139Where do you get the figure of half a million from - is it made up like the "million dead" claims. If you were so concerned about Iraqis why did you never march against Saddam's mass human rights violations including using chemical weapons against his own people?
The Rest is Politics is an excellent podcast. I have to say however that I have little respect for Alistair Campbell due to his sycophantic support for Tony Blair and his determination to paper over their disastrous actions over Iraq. That major tragedy has fuelled the war and terrorism that we have witnessed ever since. The US rightfully did not support us over Suez and we should not have supported the US over Iraq. This disaster was foreseen. Even Kofi Annan considered this to be an illegal war.
A tangential point about the legacies of colonialism, liberalism, and orientalism (particularly 11:00) and why I find Rory so refreshing. We in the Britain are still so immature when it comes to discussing other non-euro countries, and recognizing our post-colonial hangups. On the one hand there is Rory, a diplomat/child of the empire, galavanting around Asia and acting as a governor of Iraq after a tap on the shoulder. Then there's AC, who I sense really does believe in a liberal universalism, that other countries/cultures are essentially 'just like us' but with a bad guy on top. It's very easy (and has been the case) for people with an simplistic understanding of orientalist theory to charge Rory with being another exoticizing orientalist. But it's clear from this that Rory does have an appreciation that there is a way to understand/engage with cultures with respect and intellectual humility, by balancing/resisting the impulse that we can fully know/tame another society, and the ('hyper-'anti-orientalist) impulse that other cultures are essentially unknowable to a westerner and engagement is futile - it's this balance that allows him to recognize when we are making the same colonial mistakes. While AC's euro-universalism made him reticent to see the genuine difference of other countries/cultures (i.e. the particular regional/religious dynamics, overestimating the civil service, underestimating corruption etc.) leading to a kind of hubris of being unable to see his blindspots. While Rory 'the orientalist' was able to see through the misadventure by US/UK in Iraq for the ultimate folly it was. I say this to emphasize the importance of Rory's approach not to self-flagellate over the past (or our present), but to learn from it and recognize the ways we can interact, engage, and recognize the difference of other cultures, without thinking they are uniquely unknowable/unapproachable to a westerner.
Big fan of the podcast but I sometimes wonder if the real purpose of this podcast is to vindicate Tony and Alistair and cement their legacies in the history books by downplaying just how badly the government broke the trust of the electorate on this one. It's telling when you hear the case put forward here in this video is that same one that government completely switched to after they discovered that there was actually no threat and just had to go along with the American's war anyway because it suited their own internal politics. In one of the earlier podcast's Alistair described the UK's foreign policy as basically in step with the American's foreign policy. What I really wish Tony and Alistair admitted is the truth that they knew they shouldn't have gone along with that terrible, illegal war but they did so anyway to preserve that oh so "Special Relationship".
Wow, I never expected this. Very well done also. I think a lot of people would be more understanding if they were aware of what the details were and how the reasoning went with much in the politics that affect us so much. Intelligent, clearly opposing views talked through without drama and vitriol. Thank you Alistair and Rory. Mark
I can’t imagine I’d ever feel peace in my heart for the rest of my life if I played the role Alastair did in a (wholly pointless) war that killed a million Iraqi’s. Frankly, I’d never show my face in public again
Reading the comments is unbelievable. You would assume everyone watching this podcast is a fan of these two men, but I can’t see a single person supporting Alistair
I try to maintain a cognitive disconnect between the Campbell of then and the Alistair of now. It’s impossible to do that when listening to him talk about Iraq.
@@user-td4do3op2d i knew a guy from church who used to steal from people, he went to prison for abit and he deserved to do so. But that doesn’t mean he was forever outcast and was undeserving of being listened too. Same with Alister, he probably deserved to serve a stretch in prison for lying about the war but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have interesting things to say and an enlightening perspective
@@fburton8agree with your point here fburton. We are also strong with the truth with him to get him to admit wrongs. He’s getting there. I hope one day he does turn round and admit that in the balance of things they did do “the ends justified the means”. God rest his soul if he doesn’t 🤷♂️
@@joshme3659 I'm not religious, but I believe the key to forgiveness is to repent. I have time for AC on almost any other subject, and Iraq was a terrible stain on Blairs otherwise very successful leadership, but sorry if he's going to shamefully continue to spout his lies it is going to wind people up who otherwise might have a lot of time for him.
I almost feel some sympathy for Alastair Campbell over Iraq. He has to reconcile two opposing beliefs in his head at the same time, but can only openly admit to one of them. It was always obvious that the US had decided that they were going into Iraq soon after 9/11. The UK due it its "special relationship" was almost obliged to support the US in this endeavour due to geopolitical reasons, so Blair had little choice but to support the US in the "coalition of the willing" in order to keep that relationship intact as it was going to happen even if he opposed it. Hindsight's a wonderful thing but the UK was placed in an almost impossible position. I don't think this is quite comparable to Wilson and Vietnam, as was suggested in the podcast. Our military was much more powerful and independent then.
Credit to Rory who “chairs” this discussion with brilliance. There was no reason for the UK to send its ground troops. The Americans were going to go regardless. Instead the UK preferred to think itself still a big player, punches above its weight and was still a world force. We weren’t, we’re not, we are a tiny island former power not a current one Blair could and should have said no. That would have been a far more courageous decision
'Failure' in iraq and Afghanistan is one of the causes of the present the Age of Non-intervention. Reviewing and reevaluating those times will help give us the resolve to tackle Russian and Chinese aggression. Failure now could lead to one of the greatest reversals in recorded human history.
I love how Rory sits there grinning whilst Alistair is getting quite worked up 😂 Well handled by both, clearly a lot of passion from Alistair and Rory did a perfect job of grilling him without going too far. This is the kind of transparency into politics that the British public deserve.
No you are not! He seems to forget so much, to long in power gets to every man. He’s not evil he’s just a man who has not the expertise to deal with what is in front of him.
@@JimEdwards-i2k I found this to be true as well. I was surpirsed when Allistair was surprised when Rory said the Americans were destroying the Iraqi trade unions. In every book I have read about the Iraq war, it was brought up that they did this. I don't think he has ever read about this topic. I don't think he can do it. If I had lied the country in to a bloody war which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, I couldn't face it.
Thank you chaps. I liked hearing Alistair's side of the story without hindsight, that being said, in hindsight Rory was right to say the intelligence services got it "catastrophicly wrong" there were no MWD's and that was the one call the intelligence services needed to make.
It was blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention at the time that it was a complete stitch up job, blaming military intelligence for it has zero credibility.
I understand AC gets attacked a lot over Iraq which is likely why he is so defensive. The main thing that appears to grind people's gears is that WITH hindsight neither Tony or AC appear to have any remorse for the mess they were part of and they still insist on the idea that on balance they made the right call. There is also a problem that AC highlights all the evidence and intelligence that was coming across Tony's desk, I get it but why can't he admit he was mislead? AC insists that part of the main reason they went to war was Saddam's record etc. That was not the argument that was made to the public. There was an impression that they made their decision and then set the media machine to work in convincing the public to be on side with the bullshit report. I remember seeing pictures in the Daily Mail of Saddam's nuclear weapons bunkers in the desert and how he could launch WMD at any moment. It was all garbage and regardless of blame, its infuriating to hear AC/Tony not accept we went to war on false pretense. It's so important as it is a defining moment of my later teenage years and for many millennials is a trigger point for the utter distrust and lack of faith in modern government. Exactly like with Covid, we have to ask the question, is it ok to mislead the public to get them to support an end goal that might be correct? There is a very real boy called wolf situation and after a time people will not respond in the way you expect.
Gentlemen, Thank you for a most informative,adult and robust discussion of this intriguing and complex subject which has altered positively what I see now was my somewhat shallow understanding of Mr Campbell s part in the matter whilst also appreciating Mr Stewart's point of view. I was drawn to the podcasts after enjoying Mr Stewart's highly intelligent writing and have been most impressed by the knowledge, recall and clarity of thought displayed by you both. The obvious respect you have for each other notwithstanding any underlying differences of opinion is an example to all. Well done!
Thank you Rory for reiterating the facts to Alistar, and having the moral compass to admit when you’re wrong and when you’re right, even when it doesn’t reflect well on you.
One of your best episodes the on the ground & ‘room where it happened’ experience you both bring respectively is utterly compelling and fascinating. Challenged my views on iraq significantly
6:04 important clarification- The US intelligence was saying they were. British intelligence (GCHQ) was saying the opposite. If Blair and Cambell had backed our own intelligence service, there would have been no case.
Even US intelligence agencies was saying the opposite about it, bush administration steam pipeed by Cheney’s special intelligence team committee 😂 which got their “intelligence “ from german intelligence agency who got it from a shawarma guy iraqi dissident who lived in berlin and wanted to get rid of saddam’s regime and “curve ball” another iraqi dissident called ahmed al chalabi who then been discovered to be iran/israeli double agent 😂😂
Funny how Alastair keeps mentioning the UN resolutions Saddam had violated but without even looking up Israel had definitely violated far more resolutions at the time including all the settlements in the 90s alone. Still as arrogant as he was. Nothing changed.
Amazing privilege to listen to this. How amazing is it we can listen to hours of frank conversations from people who were actually there and amongst it. Thank you guys for putting this out there. I cant even imagine that amount of stress on that scale.
I find TRIP to be a really good source to stay on top of international politics, but indeed find it hard getting past Campbell's complicity in Iraq. Millions dead and still affected to this day, the entire region destabilised and continuing misery that will last generations, all to line the pockets and feed the egos of already incredibly wealthy men. A true tragedy and an epic turning point in contemporary history that can in part is responsible for the current rise of Fascism in the West, which Alistair so abhors (due to increased levels of refugees/migration from the Middle East). I know Alistair sticks to his script on his involvement, as I imagine it's the only thing that lets him sleep at night, but I feel in the long run it would be better to admit what he knows deep down - that it was morally, ethically, practically, and spiritually bankrupt to support the invasion and that he should hold himself partly accountable.
If you check the historical record, “millions” is untrue. The records indicate between 100000 and 200000 depending on on which one you choose. Exaggerating a catastrophe demeans rather than enhances the criticism
@@stanby2712 They said "Millions dead and still affected". Presumably those still affected are not dead. Therefore millions include both those who died as a result of the war _plus_ those who are still affected.
Rory is definitely right. The intelligence was terrible and used in a calculated and misleading manner. Most would be evaluated as X4 or D4, unreliable source and uncorroborated information not known personally to them. Shocking that the intelligence professionals let that go into a dossier without massive caveats. And shocking that they didn't have any consequences. It seems that most of the people involved for carried away with the moment and confirming what the boss wants to hear. Relying on Tony Blairs 'view' and 'belief' doesn't make it any more reliable or trustworthy. I agree he had already decided and was seeking only a way forward to war, which then orchestrated the machinery confirm his thoughts and need to start a false war.
Alastair goes on about how they thought Saddam was developing chemical weapons and were actively using them conveniently leaves out the fact the US and UK backed the Iraqis against Iran in the 80s and yeah they knew he had chemical weapons because they helped him get and use them…
Rory saying he doesn't want to be fair to the intelligence services because they "fucked up bigly" is excellent and more discourse should be like this.
Unfortunately he stops short of saying that Campbell and Blair as well as Dearlove are fully responsible. The damage that it did to British relations, our identity, economy, and subsequent geopolitics has been horrendous. Campbell’s insistence that “we had reasons” is hardly exonerating.
We forget though that there was alot of pressure coming from AUIPAC to start a war in the middle east too, especially after 9/11. Read Professor Mersheimers book on the Israel lobby.
It takes alot of courage to go against the lobby because you will lose your political career.
We shouldn't underestimate how much sway they hold over powerful people in the US. Best kept secret in US politics.
I can clearly remember Helen Clark saying she had seen the same intelligence, due to 5 eyes and in what you have to admit took some courage kept NZ out of Iraq. She saw the same info but drew the correct conclusion. You should interview Helen Clark and ask her how she got it right.
Yes, it would be interesting to hear her view of the same evidence.
With respect, Helen Clark also gets a lot wrong these days - particularly on China.
I would have been a lot easier for Helen Clark to say no than for Tony Blair TBF. US wouldnt be putting the same kind of squeeze on NZ.
@@adtastic1533 Agreed
@@willbaitup could you elaborate on that?
I have been waiting for this difficult conversation for some time and it was worth the wait. Kudos to you both for facing it square on.
It's been on itunes for over a year.
You cant say this podcast doesn't do tough conversations. I have a lot of respect for Alistair Campbell here, purely for the fact its the one conversation you'd expect them to avoid. They confront it head on for nearly two hours, and there is a lot to be said for that alone.
Agreed, but it is rather damning how Campbell still vehemently defends his role and actions in the atrocities. Campbell even mentions himself that he received a warning that fulfilling the duties of a spin doctor, you can easily get lost in your own opinions and forget your true values and beliefs. So at least he's self aware.
I did not expect to see this headline for their podcast. Wow. I’m glad he’s done this cause despite what people now know him for as part of this podcast, Iraq is the most central thing about him and his identity and legacy. I’m just really glad he was courageous enough to do this no matter what you think of him.
Respect the podcast but not Campbell’s justifications.
@@rsb8380 I would respect Campbell more if he had Hans Blix as a guest. I'll never forget how he revealed some of the lies the US and UK were saying.
I dont because hes not actually taking any responsibility.
Former French president Jacques Chirac warned that this unjustified military invasion of Iraq would have disastrous consequences for the region and the world, 2 decades later we are still dealing with the repercussions terror, hatred, resentment and violence.
This is the legacy of the bush - Blair era.
I thank Rory very much for his impartial and truthful analysis, I find it hard to believe that Mr Campbell is still in denial even after 2 decades of this unmitigated catastrophe.
Some people can’t handle the truth
He’s allergic to accountability.
There was hatred, resentment and violence in Iraq and surrounding countries long before 2003. It's a cesspit of hope & anything liberal
@@capybara2450 No sorry that’s what people like Campbell would say, “ we had to do it anyway”.
What a completely ridiculous, reductive and racist thing to suggest. Not just for ignoring the rich cultural history of Iraq, but also for ignoring the legacy of foreign intervention and colonialism. Plus conflicts in the ME aren’t just a lack of liberal values or hope, they’re a combination of material political, economic and social issues. Stop listening to these two liberal clowns and read a book.
@@VillagePotemkin that is every excuse politicians make...look at Robert Mc Namara...confessed Vietnam was a false flag operation in a movie called Fog of War. But still defended his actions...millions deaf and 20 year war.
The complete lack of contrition or any admission from Alistair Campbell that he got it horribly wrong is depressing and disappointing but in no way surprising.
Well he may have supported Blair but at the end of the day it wasn’t Alastair who made the decision. Plus I doubt many of us would find it easy to make an admission of association with such a catastrophe
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
@@TrevorBarre Didn't need it to know it was a terrible idea. A million marched, remember.
"There was a lack of proper planning - we thought they ( the US ) were doing it" - Alastair, that's pathetic.
@@FTT2002 He literally worked on the 'dodgy' dossiers telling us all that there were WMD. (NB: there weren't any)
AC is not picking up the point Rory is trying to repeatedly make about the depth of cultural and geopolitical misunderstanding about the region and the impact of their decision-making.
Rory said I think somewhere that nobody had predicted that the invasion of Iraq would strengthen Iran. I suspect people did predict it but chose to deal with Iraq in isolation.
Not to mention that Campbell and all of Blair's Cabinet are War Criminals and we're never held accountable.
He does pick it up, saying that it is impractical for a P.M. of the UK to have to be able to understand all the languages in the world. I accept that point. It is up to the advisers to advise the UK P.M. effectively. In short, people like Rory…
@@Paulus8765that was predicted my many OUTSIDE of the Washington/London insiders at the time. A power vacuum could begin that would only strengthen Iran. This was waved away and in America you were called a naive dove or worse an unpatriotic wimp
blow back has never been something US foreign policy has considered
The fact that these two have continued to work together for a long time after this conversation took place is testament to their characters. No matter where you sit on this debate, its a joy to see two people act like grown ups - in a world that is fragmented, populist focussed, and obsessed with the view of the general public. Bravo.
One of them should be in jail.
Both of them are useless...absolutely useless....and they know it deep down inside. They literally produce nothing of value, but noise.
The way they don't let their massive failures that destroyed untold thousands of lives get in the way of their sense of superiority is amazing to watch
@@fwarktheyeti both of them...look at that former tories voting record. He is a ruthless as any...don't let the " nice guy, reformed character " deceive you.
I think it’s testament to reason why Rory Stewart will never a top level politician. He lacks the bite and toughness of what makes a leader.
Rory comes out of this conversation as an honest man and a superior intellect. Campbell is still living in the Bliar Bubble.
RIP Dr. David Kelly
. . . . who, as a man who knew where all the political bodies were buried, conveniently committed suicide. 'Nuff sed?
Wicked. An honourable man put in an unconscionable position. RIP Dr Kelly indeed.
Dr David Kelly who cleared AC at all times and whose own position was that Saddam wanted WMDs, even if he didn’t have them?
@@exigency2231 The same. Why wouldn't Saddam want WMD? That's not the point; the point is that, contrary to the BS put out by Bush & Blair, he didn't have them. They said he did. They lied; Iraquis died.
Who was the guy who dropped him in it. Probably a complete and utter pr1ck.
Really fascinating. Just one thing not discussed. I was a Blairite at the time and supported the build up to the Iraq invasion to force Iraq's compliance with UN resolutions, until the very moment our troops crossed the border. Just before, with US and UK build up on the border, everyone's forgotten that Sadam did fully capitulate and agreed to all demands to allow full inspections. I thought, naively, wow its worked! No need for war now.
But we still invaded anyway, to my horror, and at that moment my support stopped as i realised it was not about WMDs at all but about a desire for war itself.
@juliangilbert5465 I for one really appreciate your honesty and your view on this. I remember this too (D'you remember Tony Benn interviewing Saddam Hussein!? It all felt so bizzarre)
I must say though, for those of us who opposed it lock stock and barrel at the time, who could see the US's cassus belli for what it was...it really brings back my screaming frustration at not being listened to.
I say this mainly because this is exactly how I feel about the Israel Palestine genocide right now, and the US and UK support for it. 20 years on and nothing has changed.
To reiterate, because I was pretty raw there - I appreciate what you've shared and believe you when you say you were horrified.
@@tomb020780 I think I'm rare in I've been on both sides of the playing field, on a journey from originally (pretty strong) Blairite to Corbynite. The Left has consistently proven to be right on just about everything. Most people are supposed to move right as they get older - I've moved Left and the Iraq war was a large part of making that shift.
I didn't know that! Can you send me a contemporaneous news article wherein Sadam acquiesced to full inspections? I'm curious what people made of it or if there were any caveats
@@ElliotShayle One reference reporting on Saddam Hussein’s decision to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq is from BBC News on November 13, 2002. The article titled “Iraq Agrees to Weapons Inspections” details Iraq’s acceptance of U.N. Resolution 1441 and the return of inspectors.
I think the problem was that Saddam Hussein was still giving the inspectors the run around, probably because he didn't want Iran and other enemies to know that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction? Blair and Bush thought he was still hiding the WMD. I think they should've both resigned when none were found, the buck should stop with them, but they had no shame.
Rory is a wonderful friend here to Alastair.
For me, that was the most heartening aspect of this episode (by far).
😊😊😊😊😊😊😊
The desire to find WMD cost Dr David Kelly his life, whether by suicide or MI6/MI5 sculduggery. Before that, he was called a middle brow academic by a press stooge of the government, instead of an expert in his field, which he was. That was what sickened the public once they had time to consider all the ramifications. It was and looked forced.
It was suicide, the state didn't off him.
'Part of the case for war' - what utter and unmitigated horseshit. The case for war made to the British people was that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could hit us within 45 minutes and that they were prepared to do so, necessitating a pre-emptive strike. We lived through those times and we remember.
Going back to the question 'Do you understand why people are still angry about the war?' - have you ever considered that a major part of it is decades of post-hoc justifications and gaslighting the public, trying to say that this was not the case being made for the war? We will go to our graves angry about it if this is not engaged with honestly.
Israel intelligence was behind all of US mass murder wars
I agree. As I remember it, the case made to the public was entirely based on Iraq's supposed WMD capability (the "dodgy dossier"), and we were repeatedly told that regime change was not the objective.
The anger, at least in my case and I suspect more widely, stemmed from a feeling that the public were being taken for fools - fed an obviously false narrative about something as serious as going to war.
Honestly, regardless of whether or not toppling Sadam's regime was the right thing to do, it was this dishonesty about the motives that made me angry.
If you send your armed forces to war, and want people to support that war, then AT LEAST have the decency to present a compelling and honest justification for the action.
Absolutely, they seem to forget that lots of people actually remember this. Some of us have memories than can span timescales more than the length of a tweet on X.
The US wanted to go in, the US tell the UK what to do in regards foreign policy. The rest was bullshit lies, and Alistair was a key player in that.
So what do you think the real reason was?
@@williampatton7476That's a very good question, to which I don't know the answer. Unpicking all of the various western interests and agendas that might have been served by removing Saddam Hussein's regime would require a far deeper knowledge of foreign policy and Middle Eastern affairs than I possess.
The idea, mentioned by Mr. Campbell, that it might have set in motion a chain reaction of uprisings and democratic government across the region is interesting - if very naive. That might have been a consideration but, sadly, I suspect that the real motivations were less altruistic.
This episode highlights why I respect Rory much more than Alastair even though I'm on the left politically.
Just goes to prove how stupid you lefties are. Rory isnt right-wing in the slightest, he's a subversive entryist.
Rory seems more honest, balanced, less egotistical, less arrogant, less bullheaded and just generally a smarter bloke.
@sollamander2206: Same.
@JJPwfelli: Agreed.
Yeah exactly the same opinion I have. Rory I would disagree with but be friends with. Alistair is often just morally lucky (although not in this case)
Thank you gentlemen for this exceptional episode. It has put to bed a lot of the reticences I had when Alastair was commenting on the Middle East in previous episodes. It is immensely useful to hear all sides of History.
Thank you for doing this episode. It can't have been easy on a personal level. You are both stand up people and a testament on how to be polite and discuss this with courtesy and civility.
Thank you again both of you.
Appreciate this, the misinformation on this is rampant, the historical record as always is much much more complex
Sadly the misinformation came from the US and UK governments. Saddam Hussein was a monster who killed 250 000 over 20 years. America and Britain 's invasion led to the death of 1 million people in less than 2 years. Why did they do it. Look at New American century the extreme republican playbook . This advocated the regime change and predates the war by years. The motivation was not WMD. It was control of oil and political domination of the Middle East.
Not really. The same excuse about WMD's is still used as a fig leaf. It was never credible, and this doubt was very loudly expressed at the time.
He hammers the same talking points interview after interview.
He seems to think that - because one report with misinformation in it is often confused with another report with misinformation in it - he is misunderstood.
He's a very shallow, shallow man.
Hitchens razor - you say 'historical record' but provide absolutely nothing to back up your 'opinion'
Its actually very simple. Hindsight actually gives clarity and not the other way around as you suggest. Allister Campbell is a spin doctor and trying to vindicate his role in Iraq. I wouldn't be so gullible. Fog of 9/11 made the western world emotional and hungry for revenge. This laid the fertile groud for war. The neocons wanted to sells us a narrative of a great war that we had to fight. It was so persuasive that only a single American senator voted against the Iraq war in the senate. To go against the tide would of been career suicide. American neocons wanted to go into Iraq even though it did not make sense. We (the British) had to follow them due to our relationship and weak leadership. Despite countries like France abstaining. Weapons of mass destruction was a later addition. It was semantical spin at it's finest. Neocons wanted to invade Iraq because it was an oil rich country that was not under the yolk of America (rightly or wrongly). War mongers (e.g. Dick Chaney) are the ones who spread misinformation. See Israel as exhibit A or Saudi Arabia as exhibit B.
I enjoy the rest is politics, but I am so angry about the Iraq war that sometimes I find it hard to listen to Alistair. I was one of the million that went to the protest against the Iraq war in London and was devastated when we went ahead with the war. Hundreds of thousands died. I look forward to listening to this, but it may be the end of me listening to this podcast.
Me too. I was just a schoolkid at the time but I remember being so infuriated over the transparent propaganda being given to us to justify the war, that myself and two friends travelled over 3 hours on a bus to attend the protest in Scotland. It was the first time I ever travelled outside my city without family.
Like many, I am disappointed to hear Alistair Campbell still defending the indefensible. What I am waiting for is what John Pilger claimed at the outset of this whole conflict "It is all about oil". The only politician to come out of it with any credit was Colin Powell who had courage to admit that he had made a mistake.
Regime change for the sake of israel.
It's like listening to an abusive ex-husband.
I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum, but it's good to talk about it like this so many years later.
Despite all the failures and atrocities, which someone should absolutely be held to account for, leaving Saddam in power would have been absolutely devastating for the region and wider world. Think back to the now decade long civil war in Syria, with all its massacres, refugees, terrorism etc.; but Assad is a kitten compared to Saddam Hussein. He was not just capable, but willing to gas his own people by the hundreds of thousands,, engage in large-scale conventional warfare and annex other countries. He committed or played a major role in numerous terrorist attacks abroad. Remember Abu Ghraib? That place had human ears nailed to its walls when it was liberated (the mistake was not blowing it up). There is no doubt in my mind that hundreds of thousands would die either way, invasion or not.
Also, if you're a political leader after 9/11 and your intelligence services claim that WMD will be given to terrorists next, not acting on that would be criminally negligent.
A lot of stuff Rory says is bang on correct. The group think and the politicking was a huge factor.
I'd encourage everyone watching this video to do their own research and not let AC and others try and obfuscate the facts by saying "well at that moment in time..."
AC was Blair's professional spin doctor and he will never stop spinning tales on Iraq. It's all he knows.
@@hithere981read the wiki pages on the war, and the bbc and sky broadcasts to get a sense of the media environment at the time, i dont think thats too biased
It's extraordinary.
'Whoops. Well. hindsight is 20/20'
is just not good enough.
If you’re going to say they lied and do your own research, give an example of where he is?
@@hithere981 they said there were wmds and there were no wmds so they lied, and the war their lie justified killed alot of people
@@hithere981 what do you mean write them off? He lied to sell a catastrophic war to the public and deserves some prison time because of that, doesn’t mean i cant enjoy his podcast
Even Eliza Manningham-Buller, MI5,said on this podcast that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
@@SuperVaji
It was pretty obvious
Didn’t need MI5 to tell us that.
General Wesley Clark has said many times that the Bush administration entered office in January 2001 planning to invade Iraq. He said he knew staff officers in the Pentagon who were working on the plans before 9/11.
One of the reasons why Campbell was such an effective member of Blair's team is that he seems to genuinely 100% believe his own spin; the spin that helped to legitimise Blair's bs. And he hasn't changed. He can't. I don't think there are many people that could comprehend and accept the consequences of their own actions when they are so impactful and significant and wrong.
AC is a war criminal
Agreed. If you were a key part of one the worst foreign policy mistakes in British history then self delusion is the only viable option.
I find it absolutely amazing that you bring up Sadam Husain's record when he was supported by the West throughout the 1980s when he was fighting Iran and gassing his own people !! Not to mention the fact that the UK was trying to sell him a 'super gun' (having already supplied his regime with weapons) on the eve of the fiest Gulf War. But to listen to Alistair butter woildnt melt. It is this fundamental lack of honesty that makes people ro angry about this to this day.
Always find it so funny that that's 'forgotten'
Yh great point. It is selective reasoning. Allister Campbell is a spin doctor and trying to vindicate his role in Iraq. He is being dishonest here.
AC sounds completely dillusional and arrogant, and his justification, "what if the (WMD) had been found and they were used" is extraordinary. Essentially what he's saying is the annihilation of a million innocent Iraqi people and the disintegration of Iraq and the region since this catastrophic error was entirely acceptable as dead, innocent Iraqis are more acceptable collateral damage. How utterly unforgivable to have traded your lies for their lives, and to continue the spin all these years later. To then go on and dismiss Rory's entirely reasonable point that neither the decision maker (Blair) nor his spindoctor (Campbell) should be expected to have any real or indepth knowledge of the middle east at the time (and apparently still don't) shows a level of arrogance and ego that is far more dangerous to humanity than hypothetical WMDs.
Further, Blair jumping on the Bush bandwagon to try to link Iraq to September 11th and Al Qaeda also demonstrates their ignorance of the region and willingness take these decisions regardless of being entirely uneducated about the makeup of the Middle East....not a single hijacker on 9/11 was iraqi (or afghani for that matter), the majority were Saudi. Tony preferred to lie about the al qaeda link to Iraq (there was none) than question why the Americans (who supported sadam in the 80s against Iran and encouraged his invasion of Kuwait) did not spend a minute looking at countries with actual links like Saudi? Sadam Hussein was a horrible man but the UK and the US are friends with far, far worse and dont invade and slaughter their people in this way.
I am forever in awe of Rory Stewart: his intelligence, depth of knowledge, grace when dealing with ignorance. He is exceptional.
The UK didn't try to sell Iraq a "Super Gun", that was a domestic Iraqi programme led by the Canadian Artillery designer Gerald Bull. The Iraqis did buy sections of steel high pressure pipe from a UK manufacturer stating they were for Oil/Gas pipelines rather then a Super Gun. The pipe was intercepted by customs and confiscated as breaking then existing sanctions against Iraq.
The CIA actively assisted Saddam's political party into power, prior to Saddam being leader
This podcast, one of your finest and most earnest exchanges, is a testament to your commitment to learning and growth. Your ability to disagree agreeably, share honest recollections, and offer stern rebuttals while always being willing to then consider each other’s experiences is truly inspiring. We have all learnt from the light of experience in the case of this war, and its legacy will preoccupy our universal consciousness. To you both, your integrity has not only survived beyond this war but has also contributed to our collective learning. With its insightful discussions, your podcast continues to be a valuable source of learning for all.
Well done, guys.
Thank you once again Alistair and Rory for this deep dive. This long format discussion is such an impressive example of why your podcast is so globally respected by every day people. Your close personal insights expand on this moment in history as an afterword not only for Great Britain but also the other allies of the west from that time; for myself as an Australian watching this all unfold in my early 20s is almost cathartic to help compartmentalize my country’s role in this war as well. Specifically with regards to Richard Butler who was chairman of UNSCOM and who was literally an Australian household name during the lead up to the invasion of Iraq due to his major role in “identifying” WMDs in Iraq at that time. Thank you for both opening up on your own personal perspectives and challenging each other on this incredibly controversial moment in modern history to help everyday laymen potentially come to either some kind of solace or at least have clarity that was never offered through traditional media at the time. Profound stuff.
agree as a fellow australian. Also those who are black and white on this issue miss the nuance that this discussion is showing.
Cambell is still in denial. Maybe for someone suffering from depression it is hard for him to face the terrible terrible mistake he made.
I think if you watched the entire video and don’t understand their perspective, then you lack a degree of empathy and understanding. You can see the intelligence reports and Blair truly felt the need to prioritise our security
He's just a lying bastard.
Facing huge very consequential mistakes is what will get rid of the depression.
or maybe he just doesn't give a crap
In denial about what exactly? Be great if you could add some clarity. Do you believe he is in denial about whether he did or didn't deceive the public, or denial about the failure or otherwise to challenge the 'intelligence' at the time adequately, or in denial about whether despite all the information to hand, Tony made the right decision? I'm not arguing with you, I'm just wondering what exactly you believe he is in denial about, because people have differing opinions about that. Some people are convinced that even with the information they had to hand, they made the wrong decision to stick with the Americans, and they believe that if the Americans had been left to go in alone things would have been different for the region, that the absence of the UK forces would have somehow led to fewer deaths and that our relationship with the US would have been unharmed. Others are sure that all the enquiries were hoaxes and that Tony knew all all along that there weren't WMDs and that the intelligence community was persuaded somehow, en masse, to lie to the courts about the evidence they gave Tony at the time about what was 'known' at that time. I'd love to know if you know some people in the intelligence community, and perhaps you consider them all to be so weak-willed and willing to fall on their swords, because the evidence they gave made them look pretty terrible. Just interested to know what exactly you consider him to be in denial about?
I am grateful for this conversation. It was a brave thing to do, and there are obvious differences of opinion between you, but I love the dynamic of the podcast as you deal with them. It's an invitation to all the haters to fill the thread with insults and well rehearsed one liners, but I hope there will be many who will have appreciated your insights and memories of your experience of those tragic events as insiders. Historians have got their work cut out to unravel the issues for decades to come. I feel more enlightened. Thank you.
R.I.P. Dr David Kelly x
"Constantly defied the UN and got away with it" - Alasdair Campbell is talking about Israel, right?
The USA and UK's manipulation and pressuring of the UN to support the action against Iraq discredited everyone, including the UN itself.
the us and uk didnt defy the un. the un never explicitly said no you cant invade Iraq they just wouldnt back the decision to
Hundreds of times, I think.
Campbell's demeanour when the topic gets near to "the dossier" tells you everything you need to know.
The brass neck of Alistair. Rory handled this well Alistair ready to explode as usual.
My loathing for the majority of British politicians started with Blair and Campbell. They took our country in to war on a lie. That's the worst betrayal I can imagine.
Campbell is a master at diversion and strikes me as a slimeball.
The issue seems to be that they were regurgitating bad Intel without adequate caveats. They believed the rumours as fact, and therefore misled the public into supporting an invasion. So it wasn't a lie, just bad governance.
@@BIGGIEsmalls13 slimeball? I can think of far worse but would probably get starmer's plod knocking on my door.....
The Americans lied, the problem is they bought it, watch the leading with ex mi5 head and diplomatic service dude
@@RobertThomson-y4m you know this bs about people being arrested for usually normal things online is bs, so why do you parrot it?
I was very reluctant to watch TRIP because of Campbell/Iraq. I still think that Iraq is the biggest disaster/catalyst for the disintegration of the middle east, British standing, political trust, world order, and Isis etc. My skin crawls whenever AC tries to weasel out, and makes me want to quit the pod, I'm thankful for Rory at least putting the case forward with authority/knowledge/conviction, especially considering even Rory's position could have labelled you an unpatriotic loon a couple decades ago, and at least we are beginning to have this conversation. I have very little sympathy for AC, but I can see/imagine the psychological defense mechanisms he must have put up to justify to himself what he did (though I have absolutely zero time for Blair).
I knew none of this-I came to the pod for Rory having read The Places In Between. I’d gathered that he worked for Blair but wow, he has a lot to feel bad about even if he doesn’t openly. Rory was wonderful.
The middle east was perpetually f*cked since WW1. Don't kid yourself
I get why Rory feels like he does about the catastrophe that unfolded after the successful toppling of the Iraqi government. I’m happy to accept Alastair’s account, unlike many others, but what I find so difficult to understand is why were the Americans and the Brits so naive over the natural anger and resentment of the Shia having been so brutally repressed for so long. The consequences of not grasping that most obvious of outcomes is where I condemn both Tony Blair and George Bush. The results speak for themselves in the internecine fighting between Sunni and Shia, the destruction of the ancient Christian community and the persecution of all the other religious communities in Iraq. It seems to me a no brainer that Shia Iran was bound to jump in and cause chaos and quite honestly you wouldn’t have had to be a savant to imagine that resulting in a group like ISIS.
This isn’t 20 20 vision; this is simply a basic understanding of history. In a way, you can understand the Americans being dumb….but Blair should have given thought to the consequences…..when you knock the lid off a powder keg you first game-plan how to manage the after effects.
Having said all that you can understand the effect on the American psyche of having highjacked planes full of passengers being flown into office blocks in New York and the Pentagon. Just imagine the trauma if that had happened in London or Birmingham or Edinburgh.
All very true.
Just shows you why we shouldn't listen to religious head cases of any persuasion.
Islamophobia? Don't make me laugh - they hate each other just as much as Yaxley-Lennon hates them.
Antisemitism? Netanyahu would applaud Hamas wiping out Jews he thought opposed him.
Christianity? More schisms that the global anti-capitalist left and it still doesn't stop them killing each other in the name of God.
Buddhists killed how many Hindus in Sri Lanka?
How many Muslims have Hindus killed in India?
What happened is Iraq was exactly what the US wanted to happen, a quick regime change wouldn't have maintained delivered western control over the oil fields. Also they have to send a message to any other country that dared to speak of selling oil in anything other than US Dollars.
@@matthewbazeley2984I agree :-)
When I tell people I watch the Rest Is Politics with Alistair Campbell they often react with “that monster?” and at first I didn’t fully get it. After watching this episode however, I now do. You do get a sense that he thinks he can brutishly plow through his own interpretation of events: “the intelligence we were given was at fault”…but then later “I do think we should go lightly on the head of MI6 at the time” (paraphrase)… or the fact he admits “how difficult it was to gather information at the time” but then how they nevertheless decided to commit the lives of thousands of service(wo)men and Iraqi citizens on said intelligence. All this mixed with his unearned air of irritability and abrasiveness about being asked why and how he screwed up makes for a pretty tough watch. Imagine working for this man as an intern when you know he’s wrong on something and needing to inform/convince him of it when he thinks he’s right - ask yourself, how would this man react? This vid gives a pretty good idea. Kudos to Rory for asking some great questions though.
In the end it’s all just very tragic. A declining country holding on (under hubristic leadership) for foreign policy relevancy at the behest of a few very dubious individuals pulling the strings in US politics (whom Alistair also seems to go lightly on btw…)
23:50
"For Tony right to the very end he was motivated that this should not go to war".
My God he's really convinced himself to believe that.
I don't know why he can't just say he was wrong
@@Eltener123 it’s become part of him (AC) now. If he denied it, he would fragment. It might become a death-bed confession (private).
They’d just off him. He’s lose everything. Criminals need to stick together, they turn on snitches.
@@Eltener123 I guess that would take courage. AC has none. Rather pathetic individual
The destruction of an entire people is truly devastating. Many fail to grasp the complexities of power in the Middle East. A Syrian friend of mine, now a refugee in Australia, believes the region isn’t ready for democracy due to the influence of extremist groups within Islam, which we saw firsthand in Syria. For now, secular dictatorships seem to provide the most stability. While democracy could be possible in the future, the region simply isn’t ready yet. Many Iraqis have even said that life was better under Saddam, with stability, no hyperinflation, reliable access to basic services like water and without US companies exploiting their resources. Unfortunately, this important context is often ignored in favour of a Western-centric perspective. Stop being so naive, Alistair. Iraq was an easy target for the US after 9/11-to appear in control, sell weapons, allow US-backed companies to dominate key Iraqi industries and strengthen their regional influence. I believe Blair knew this, kissed the emperor’s ring, and you Alistair, played a key role in selling it to the British public. Your denial and defense of Blair, (a war criminal), is pathetic.
Jordan and Saudi Arabia seem stable, and they are monarchies.
Mr Campbell is unbearable. A generous interpretation of Campbells utterances here would be that the war was justifiable on the basis that it was strategic because of Saddam's long-term ambition to have WMDs, and further how evil Saddam was and his track record of using chemical weapons. That may well be true. However, that was not the message we, the public got. We were told Iraq represented an imminent danger to the UK and the West. And in my opinion they knew they could not get the support from the public based upon the long-term argument alone, so they ‘upped’ the part of their assessment that referred to the imminent threat to make it centre stage. IMO they mislead us at best.
You can also accuse them, Campbell and Blair, of being utterly incompetent in making key assessments, about many things such as the ‘need’ for the sake of the special relationship to go to war alongside the US, not assuring themselves that there was an adequate post invasion plan, and the bullshit about creating a domino effect of a functioning democracy in the Middle East, and not asking the hard questions about the security assessments, and failing to realize that Iran would be the big winner of the conflict
The story of how the attorney general came to change his mind is utterly unconvincing. The AG had, for sure, seen all details of all resolutions before he rendered his first opinion. There is no way he found out about the prior resolutions and /or newly understood that the case could be made that no new resolution was needed during a trip to the US.
FFS. A top lawyer making one of the most difficult and important decisions since 1956. He’d read everything on the topic, and I mean everything. Top to bottom. A whole team of advisers doing research for him on each resolution etc etc . All giving him input. The AG knew every angle and argument.
AC and TB are both very clever men, and they know, and knew, how to manipulate things. I should image it’s hard to get that high in government without those skills. But they were absolute masters of their trade. IMO he and Blair made their mind up and lent on the AG to change his opinion.
In my opinion Campbell is a war criminal. and he knew that the best analysis was that the war was illegal and a new explicit UN resolution was required.
His defence that we don’t know the counter factual is of course logically correct but that argument can be used to justify absolutely anything. On that basis you can say how do we know the world would not have been better had we not had ……..(insert your genocide of choice…) ?
His and Blair’s decisions were utterly utterly appalling. Both in terms of their judgements strategically and morally. IMO war criminals the pair and the whole episode is a stain on Britain.
It makes me wonder why anybody would give credence to what this man says on any topic given the glasses he wears don’t avail him of the truth on this topic. He is, IMO, an out and out liar, and a master of the half truth.
Sadly, many lies have been lost in consequence of this war and much damage to the function of the UN and Western interests.
Sadly the politicians/people who pushed for this war and made it a reality will not get prosecuted.
Alistair is one of them.
Even more sadly they are still at it.
@@RationalAUS I don't hold him as responsible as the politicians, that made the decisions, ignoring the inspectors.
Realistically the real decisions were made in the US. Blair’s calculation was primarily about not breaking with the US.
@@sharpvidtube I don't either but his ardent defense and doubling down on the issue doesn't do him any favours. This was tragic, all round, and we should expect more from public figures, especially the right hand man of TB.
I grew up hating Tony and new Labour over the war. This was more my parents than my own view.
Now as an adult I can empathise with the incredibly hard positions you both found yourselves in.
I hear a little of Hitchens in Alistairs comments, I suspect the crime here is that we let Saddam go on for as long as he did.
I did security work with an Afghani chap not too long ago, which helped put the horrors of these conflicts into perspective for me.
Thank you both for your efforts
Alastair struggles to fully accept the accountability required because it would mean acknowledging the consequences of his time in government and close relationship with Blair, including the lives lost. It's difficult to reconcile how many people are no longer here while he continues to speak and write books. I like the man, but if he truly took responsibility, you'd have to question why anyone involved isn't in jail.
@m.c4210 I'm not sure I agree with you. Maybe you are more aware of the nuances of Alistairs actions and his individual power to effect change.
We can't really argue about toppling Saddam, he was a genocidal maniac. The real question is how an ill considered approach to democratising was conceived and then implemented over solutions more relevant to Iraqi culture.
It is suggested in the discussion that the US military leadership were mostly responsible, for what turned out to be a diplomatically blind and dogmatic approach.
Can you think of anything specific that he should take accountability for?
It seems to me that he was a cog in a fucked up engine that would have run with or without him. I appreciate your civility here, I look forward to your input :)
How old are you revolution? I was 23 when 9/11 happened. Then the US went off in a complete tangent after failing to find Bin Laden and everybody knew it was a massive farce linking Sadam Hussein to Bin Laden, terrorism and WMD. It was a complete absurd Gulf of Tonkin moment and it was mocked of how ridiculous it was. It’s why 1 million people went on a march to protest it.
The thing you can’t do Revolution is sit there and think this is a hypothetical game of poker. Eg; Does sadam have WMD or doesn’t he?
Because the answer to that is always easy and you are gonna take his toys off him.
But back in the day when the yanks were off in Afghanistan and looking for Bin Laden whilst we all waited for justice…..they did a complete 360 and decided to do Iraq.
It was bizarre times. And the obvious lies told ricocheted into nowadays events.
Truth has evaporated.
The threat was very clearly nonsense. I was around 30 at the time, I remember it all very well, crystal clear. The intelligence community were providing excuses and dodgy evidence for the politicians, who were lapping it up to the astonishment of anyone with a brain. In my recollection, the discussions around Iraq invasion in early 2003 (before it happened) were like trying to reason with a Brexiter.
ua-cam.com/video/C8YlGkoYXXM/v-deo.htmlsi=M9GA5_zCeNZZN0IX
Robin Cook’s resignation speech was the highwater mark of British politics. Respectfully resigned, made a key point on WMD which as he was in cabinet undermines the post invasion wmd spin.
I did try to post a link to a recording of his speech (twice), but for some reason it was deleted (twice). Definitely worth a watch for anyone who hasn't seen it.
I'm from Turkiye and Middle East affairs interest me much. Listened with amazement at the elegance and the tact RS showed to AC. I could not have. I have always hated Blair and the lot for the massive muck-up. What really stuns me is the fact that AC can be out and about, walking, 'swimming' at his local pool, co-presenting a podcast, living a normal life. Is it possible to have a normal life after being even the tiniest part of such a disaster that caused the deaths of so many innocent people? How can you? How is it possible? Wow!
This is not a violent country.
I disagreed with the Iraq war.
But why should he not live a life?
A fascinating and very important piece to put out. Voices from behind the curtain and from on the ground at the time. Very nicely done. I love a good honourable debate aswell! Thank you guys!
What really matters is the state of Iraq now. That's the legacy of this awful affair you can't get around it.
Well, I have actually been to Iraq regularly, and I can tell you after Saddam, it's much better. Whether or not you think the war was good, and almost none think it was, but the fact is, it is better. And Iraq has had a huge influx of repatriates since 2003, you don't need to believe me, check it online. Huge numbers of civilians did not need to die, and it was mismanaged on a scale that is amazing, but don't say that its worse now than it was before.
@@alroeccIraq use to be a place people went to for university, very open a lot of history particularly in the Islamic world. Holiday central etc. not anymore. Along with a slew of other things. It will never be the same
It was a bad idea with made up reasons. Operation Iraqi Liberation or OIL was unecessary and both a strategic misstake plus badly excuted (the old "we will be praised as liberators and then it will get good for all" did not happen).
@@PMMagro Badly executed, but mass amnesia about (almost) all Iraqis celebrating... The Ba'athist Saddam murderers were left with all the weapons - which screwed things up. THEY did all the deliberate killings as revenge. NO benefit for the allies to simply kill innocent people, as some stupidly suggest.
@@alroecc I imagine it depends to an extent on where you look in Iraq. My understanding is that the quality of life in Iraq remains difficult for many ordinary folk. While there have been improvements in security and efforts to restore infrastructure, problems like unreliable electricity, inadequate healthcare, water shortages, unemployment and widespread corruption persist. There's more stability and better services in areas like Kurdistan, while war-damaged regions like Mosul and parts of Anbar remain severely underdeveloped. Despite Iraq's oil wealth, the benefits have not translated into improved living conditions for the majority of the population, leaving many Iraqis frustrated with their government and struggling with basic needs. Is that a fair assessment?
I was anti war and went on the march. My views on Alistair have softened through listening to this podcast week after week. I feel now not persuaded of the case for the war but much more sympathetic to the position of those who made the decision to go. I also think I have a better understanding of the complexity of the choice as a result of listening to this. The best laid plans of mice and men .....
I think you're gullible, mate.
It was obvious to everybody just listening to the news that it was utterly wrong.
Glad you feel softened, but….most of us knew it was wrong, and so it turned out to be. AC won’t find peace of mind until he sees that we had / have absolutely no business interfering so far from home.
@@lakedistrict9450 As someone who was against the war this is revisionist. Popular opinion at the time supported the war. Around 50% in favour and I think 35% against.
@@davidcjupp I didn’t know anyone for the war at the time. Where do you get the data from? In any event, if you are right, it shows how easily opinion can be nudged ?
a total unmitigated disaster, huge loss of innocent life, and service men and women. The ramifications of the intervention live with us today with a more polarised world, and reduced UN.
And perhaps partially explains the slow demise of democracy
But desert storm was a masterpiece
@@dh1380 Interestingly yes, and I think that's largely due to the goals for each operation. Desert Storm had the clear and achievable goals of restoring Kuwaiti sovereignty and destroying the Iraqi military, both of which were achieved in quick and spectacular fashion. In contrast Iraqi Freedom had nebulous and delusional goals based on the assumption that we could somehow nation build a fairly alien culture into a modern western democracy.
@@judithdavidson2356 It certainly explains the decline of the public image of western democracy, something that he Russian propaganda machine takes full advantage of.
Hans Blix the weapons inspector said diplomacy and inspections should be given more time to succeed. Why was there such a rush to invade?
$$$
Bush was pushing
Very simply because it wasn’t about weapons
This reminded me of the Blix scene in team america:D
AC and TB belong in the Hague next to Netenyahu. UK intelligence did not claim Iraq had WMD the US told them what to say
In the cell next to Putin.
Campbell's responses to the questions are pure special pleading. Basically, they bolloxed it up and hid behind the skirts of Uncle Sam. It's that simple.
So who is they? Who are the specific people and what did they bollocks job
Wow, that was an extremely frank and powerful discussion. Thanks both for your honest and forthrightness
Huge respect to Rory on how he navigated this one.
It brilliant. Alastair is in total denial and still believes it was the right thing to do. Quite incredible. But the reflection on the two lists is so brilliant. Am fantastic episode.
Mistakes were made, everyone did their best and no one is to blame. - A.Campbell
Awesome. Appreciate your work. Brilliant content.
Still running defence for war crimes
If Sadam was running the UK, you’d have wanted the coalition to invade and topple him.
Should he not have made the podcast?
Thank you both for this frank discussion. It is interesting to me to see Alistair's reaction to the very last topic. I too was able to watch this episode with calmness and interest in hearing the discussion, but as soon as I realised that Rory was going to refer to the awful event of Dr Kelly's death, I broke down. The invasion of Iraq caused me to becone ashamed to be British, and I found myself totally lost. I returned to the church after a gap of about 40 years to try to find help to make sense of it all. I think one of the legacies of the Iraq War which wasnt really touched on in this excellent podcast was the effect it had on the population of this country in terms of the relationship between the electorate, and politicians. Although recent events have damaged the trust and respect which ought to co-exist, I believe that for many people, that breakdown started back then. I understand the convictions that Alistair described, but those very opinions obscured the wider issues that needed to be considered, and blinded the decision makers.
I was in elementary school when 9/11 happened, and now that I’m a lot more politically aware, it’s absolutely fascinating to hear about the thought process about the response to that event. I appreciate your openness and candor about it. Thank you.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. People planning iraq takeover said public woukd not go along and needed a pearl harbor type event. Document s project for New Anerican Century. Clinton said no and bush said yes. Iraq was being planned early in bush admin. N
Thank you so much for this episode. Fascinating. I was and still am against the Iraq war. I appreciate your openness in this episode and respect Alistair. I understand the dilemma the prime minister must've been in. Now, I feel a lot of the terrorist threats we have are a result of this war. Who are we in the west to push our 'democratic' methods on other cultures. We in the west have a lot to answer for, why we always have to follow the US is beyond me. There were war crimes committed that have not been brought to trial. Double standards.
Rory, I can't imagine how difficult it would've been to be plonked into southern Iraq at this time. I admire how much respect you have for other cultures.
45:10 when you consider the amount of lives at stake and even in a self-serving way, the political careers on the line, the fact that nobody said "show me the hard, indisputable evidence" before all these lives are lost is unbelievable and makes it look like Blair and Bush were looking for an excuse to remove a tyrant and hopefully lead to the democratisation of the Middle East that was touched on earlier in the podcast. It'd actually be much easier to take if that's what people involved would admit.
It's awful that Alistair takes all the flack for something he didn't make the final decision on because he's still out here talking.
They either didn't know shit about the internal divisions in Iraq or they didn't care about them, which is unforgivable.
They absolutely definitely knew everything about the tribal nature of Iraqui society. Makes you wonder what the REAL reason for invading Iraq was. Just ask who benefitted most.
Agreed It’s like nobody has heard of testing their assumptions
Campbell gets angry at the criticism of the 'Intelligence ' people (who were under pressure to tell Blair what he wanted to hear) His complete lack of remorse is shameful,he has no right to be angry.What about the real, deep, visceral anger of the parents of these young soldiers slaughtered needlessly .
dont forget 2 million iraqis
Brilliant discussion as always, thankyou to Rory for pushing Alistair where he needed to be pushed. The intelligence this war was predated on was all wrong, and it was known to be wrong.
As a psychologist, I remember thinking that Saddam's ego motivated him to act as if he had WMD when he did not. It was so counter intuitive that the possibility not a bluff was taking place could not be risked. Thank you for your thoughtful discussion.
@@Stevech1 As a psychologist I think AC cannot now accept any criticism - it would simply destroy him. This maybe follows on from what you have said.
This is literally stupid. The U.S was threating invasion with the overthrowing of his regime. It's more than ego it's absolute lunacy, which we can see in hindsight but at the time the Akum's Razor explanation was that he was obfuscating because he had something to hide. People blame the U.S leadership but not enough blame gets put on Saddam who could of let the inspectors in without restrict earlier and not wait until the point of no return.
You know they found nothing before they invaded, right?
@@TwentyTwenty90 Can you give me a source on that?
@@SarahAshelford-o1u Grow up.
Tony Blair's biggest issue was and is that he has enormous belief in his own expertise. Even when he has a very limited experience. Even after this enormous cluster... he ended up as some kind of special consultant for the middle east. When it comes down to it, Blair was and is a western democracy hawk. He's still making the same expertise errors around Israel now.
Gents I greatly appreciate you both and this difficult discussion. I believe we're still yet to have a proper and essential "air crash investigation" but the insights you've given have helped me to better understand what happened. Thank you.
As a 28 year old, the endless nuances of the politics and paranoia prior to the Iraq war are still a confusing mystery to me (no matter how much I read about it). That said, I did feel Alastair's sincerity, and Rory did really make good points, especially with regards to the intelligence services' failings.
I don't think the real problem was the fact we went to war in Iraq. I think deposing Sadam Hussein was a worthy goal. I think the problem is that we did it badly. There was such poor planning for post invasion Iraq that we ended up with a nebulous, unclear mission leading to the unwinnable forever war...
As an aging 43 year old millennial, I lived through that entire period as an adult and watched it all unfold, going from bad to worse, to disastrous, to unbearable. The definite problem was the war in Iraq. Deposing Saddam may seem a worthy goal but regime change alone is unlawful as a pretext for war, that's why the focus at the time was all on WMD as Saddam having them was necessary to provide a legal justification for a pre-emptive invasion. When it became clear that the WMD were imaginary, the entire reason for the conflict went up in smoke. So now, the ones responsible for selling the war to the public (like AC) fall back on the "Saddam was a bad man" defence because that is all they have left.
The war in Iraq was completely unnecessary, unjustifiable from a legal context, led to the complete destruction of Iraq civil society - so much so that it even spawned a new term, socioicide. It also diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan and directly led to the creation of Isis and an increase in radical Islam across the West. We are still living with the consequences of that conflict and they are all bad. And what's more, even at the time the public were against it! One and a half million people marched in London against the war in 2003, the single largest demonstration in British history. And the Blair government just closed the curtains and went to war anyway. Many people, including myself, began to lose their faith in politicians and politics at that time, and it has never recovered.
As for Campbell, I wonder if he truly believes the defence he keeps trotting out, and if it is enough to silence the ghosts of the *half million* corpses their war produced. I hope they continue to haunt him.
@@robbieshand6139Where do you get the figure of half a million from - is it made up like the "million dead" claims. If you were so concerned about Iraqis why did you never march against Saddam's mass human rights violations including using chemical weapons against his own people?
The Rest is Politics is an excellent podcast. I have to say however that I have little respect for Alistair Campbell due to his sycophantic support for Tony Blair and his determination to paper over their disastrous actions over Iraq. That major tragedy has fuelled the war and terrorism that we have witnessed ever since. The US rightfully did not support us over Suez and we should not have supported the US over Iraq. This disaster was foreseen. Even Kofi Annan considered this to be an illegal war.
A tangential point about the legacies of colonialism, liberalism, and orientalism (particularly 11:00) and why I find Rory so refreshing. We in the Britain are still so immature when it comes to discussing other non-euro countries, and recognizing our post-colonial hangups. On the one hand there is Rory, a diplomat/child of the empire, galavanting around Asia and acting as a governor of Iraq after a tap on the shoulder. Then there's AC, who I sense really does believe in a liberal universalism, that other countries/cultures are essentially 'just like us' but with a bad guy on top. It's very easy (and has been the case) for people with an simplistic understanding of orientalist theory to charge Rory with being another exoticizing orientalist. But it's clear from this that Rory does have an appreciation that there is a way to understand/engage with cultures with respect and intellectual humility, by balancing/resisting the impulse that we can fully know/tame another society, and the ('hyper-'anti-orientalist) impulse that other cultures are essentially unknowable to a westerner and engagement is futile - it's this balance that allows him to recognize when we are making the same colonial mistakes.
While AC's euro-universalism made him reticent to see the genuine difference of other countries/cultures (i.e. the particular regional/religious dynamics, overestimating the civil service, underestimating corruption etc.) leading to a kind of hubris of being unable to see his blindspots. While Rory 'the orientalist' was able to see through the misadventure by US/UK in Iraq for the ultimate folly it was.
I say this to emphasize the importance of Rory's approach not to self-flagellate over the past (or our present), but to learn from it and recognize the ways we can interact, engage, and recognize the difference of other cultures, without thinking they are uniquely unknowable/unapproachable to a westerner.
Big fan of the podcast but I sometimes wonder if the real purpose of this podcast is to vindicate Tony and Alistair and cement their legacies in the history books by downplaying just how badly the government broke the trust of the electorate on this one.
It's telling when you hear the case put forward here in this video is that same one that government completely switched to after they discovered that there was actually no threat and just had to go along with the American's war anyway because it suited their own internal politics.
In one of the earlier podcast's Alistair described the UK's foreign policy as basically in step with the American's foreign policy. What I really wish Tony and Alistair admitted is the truth that they knew they shouldn't have gone along with that terrible, illegal war but they did so anyway to preserve that oh so "Special Relationship".
The US says jump, we ask how high, it's been that way for 70+ years now,
so there was no need to tie yourself in knots pretending you had a choice...
Harold Wilson didn’t ‘jump’ re Vietnam.
@@fburton8 Which is why we haven't had a socialist government since... ; )
@@Nick3DvBAnd barely a socialist opposition.
Wow, I never expected this. Very well done also.
I think a lot of people would be more understanding if they were aware of what the details were and how the reasoning went with much in the politics that affect us so much.
Intelligent, clearly opposing views talked through without drama and vitriol.
Thank you Alistair and Rory.
Mark
I can’t imagine I’d ever feel peace in my heart for the rest of my life if I played the role Alastair did in a (wholly pointless) war that killed a million Iraqi’s. Frankly, I’d never show my face in public again
Reading the comments is unbelievable. You would assume everyone watching this podcast is a fan of these two men, but I can’t see a single person supporting Alistair
I love this podcast and can tolerate Campbell's pro-labour spin on every issue, EXCEPT when it comes to Iraq.
I try to maintain a cognitive disconnect between the Campbell of then and the Alistair of now. It’s impossible to do that when listening to him talk about Iraq.
@@user-td4do3op2d i knew a guy from church who used to steal from people, he went to prison for abit and he deserved to do so. But that doesn’t mean he was forever outcast and was undeserving of being listened too. Same with Alister, he probably deserved to serve a stretch in prison for lying about the war but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have interesting things to say and an enlightening perspective
@@fburton8agree with your point here fburton. We are also strong with the truth with him to get him to admit wrongs. He’s getting there. I hope one day he does turn round and admit that in the balance of things they did do “the ends justified the means”.
God rest his soul if he doesn’t 🤷♂️
@@joshme3659 I'm not religious, but I believe the key to forgiveness is to repent. I have time for AC on almost any other subject, and Iraq was a terrible stain on Blairs otherwise very successful leadership, but sorry if he's going to shamefully continue to spout his lies it is going to wind people up who otherwise might have a lot of time for him.
I almost feel some sympathy for Alastair Campbell over Iraq. He has to reconcile two opposing beliefs in his head at the same time, but can only openly admit to one of them. It was always obvious that the US had decided that they were going into Iraq soon after 9/11. The UK due it its "special relationship" was almost obliged to support the US in this endeavour due to geopolitical reasons, so Blair had little choice but to support the US in the "coalition of the willing" in order to keep that relationship intact as it was going to happen even if he opposed it.
Hindsight's a wonderful thing but the UK was placed in an almost impossible position. I don't think this is quite comparable to Wilson and Vietnam, as was suggested in the podcast. Our military was much more powerful and independent then.
Credit to Rory who “chairs” this discussion with brilliance.
There was no reason for the UK to send its ground troops. The Americans were going to go regardless. Instead the UK preferred to think itself still a big player, punches above its weight and was still a world force. We weren’t, we’re not, we are a tiny island former power not a current one
Blair could and should have said no. That would have been a far more courageous decision
Fascinating insight into the decision making process, thank you both
One of your best to date guys..well done
This video was a really interesting insight into what happened
'Failure' in iraq and Afghanistan is one of the causes of the present the Age of Non-intervention.
Reviewing and reevaluating those times will help give us the resolve to tackle Russian and Chinese aggression. Failure now could lead to one of the greatest reversals in recorded human history.
Quite brave of alistair to agree to this no matter what you feel about the decisions he has made.
I’m not sure it’s necessarily brave, more self serving and delusional, he’s made a career on the lies he told himself and the public
I love how Rory sits there grinning whilst Alistair is getting quite worked up 😂 Well handled by both, clearly a lot of passion from Alistair and Rory did a perfect job of grilling him without going too far. This is the kind of transparency into politics that the British public deserve.
am I the only person screaming at my screen as Alistair speaks ??? "
No.
No you are not!
He seems to forget so much, to long in power gets to every man.
He’s not evil he’s just a man who has not the expertise to deal with what is in front of him.
Look at the Middle East: once you become blinded by hate, reason goes out of the window, facts that contradict are disregarded. Sad.
No
@@JimEdwards-i2k I found this to be true as well. I was surpirsed when Allistair was surprised when Rory said the Americans were destroying the Iraqi trade unions. In every book I have read about the Iraq war, it was brought up that they did this. I don't think he has ever read about this topic. I don't think he can do it. If I had lied the country in to a bloody war which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, I couldn't face it.
Thank you chaps. I liked hearing Alistair's side of the story without hindsight, that being said, in hindsight Rory was right to say the intelligence services got it "catastrophicly wrong" there were no MWD's and that was the one call the intelligence services needed to make.
It was blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention at the time that it was a complete stitch up job, blaming military intelligence for it has zero credibility.
I understand AC gets attacked a lot over Iraq which is likely why he is so defensive. The main thing that appears to grind people's gears is that WITH hindsight neither Tony or AC appear to have any remorse for the mess they were part of and they still insist on the idea that on balance they made the right call. There is also a problem that AC highlights all the evidence and intelligence that was coming across Tony's desk, I get it but why can't he admit he was mislead? AC insists that part of the main reason they went to war was Saddam's record etc. That was not the argument that was made to the public. There was an impression that they made their decision and then set the media machine to work in convincing the public to be on side with the bullshit report. I remember seeing pictures in the Daily Mail of Saddam's nuclear weapons bunkers in the desert and how he could launch WMD at any moment. It was all garbage and regardless of blame, its infuriating to hear AC/Tony not accept we went to war on false pretense.
It's so important as it is a defining moment of my later teenage years and for many millennials is a trigger point for the utter distrust and lack of faith in modern government. Exactly like with Covid, we have to ask the question, is it ok to mislead the public to get them to support an end goal that might be correct? There is a very real boy called wolf situation and after a time people will not respond in the way you expect.
Gentlemen, Thank you for a most informative,adult and robust discussion of this intriguing and complex subject which has altered positively what I see now was my somewhat shallow understanding of Mr Campbell s part in the matter whilst also appreciating Mr Stewart's point of view. I was drawn to the podcasts after enjoying Mr Stewart's highly intelligent writing and have been most impressed by the knowledge, recall and clarity of thought displayed by you both. The obvious respect you have for each other notwithstanding any underlying differences of opinion is an example to all. Well done!
Thank you Rory for reiterating the facts to Alistar, and having the moral compass to admit when you’re wrong and when you’re right, even when it doesn’t reflect well on you.
One of your best episodes the on the ground & ‘room where it happened’ experience you both bring respectively is utterly compelling and fascinating. Challenged my views on iraq significantly
6:04 important clarification- The US intelligence was saying they were. British intelligence (GCHQ) was saying the opposite. If Blair and Cambell had backed our own intelligence service, there would have been no case.
Even US intelligence agencies was saying the opposite about it, bush administration steam pipeed by Cheney’s special intelligence team committee 😂 which got their “intelligence “ from german intelligence agency who got it from a shawarma guy iraqi dissident who lived in berlin and wanted to get rid of saddam’s regime and “curve ball” another iraqi dissident called ahmed al chalabi who then been discovered to be iran/israeli double agent 😂😂
Funny how Alastair keeps mentioning the UN resolutions Saddam had violated but without even looking up Israel had definitely violated far more resolutions at the time including all the settlements in the 90s alone. Still as arrogant as he was. Nothing changed.
Alastair is completely devoid of humility and contrition - entirely shameless and morally bankrupt
Amazing privilege to listen to this. How amazing is it we can listen to hours of frank conversations from people who were actually there and amongst it.
Thank you guys for putting this out there. I cant even imagine that amount of stress on that scale.
I find TRIP to be a really good source to stay on top of international politics, but indeed find it hard getting past Campbell's complicity in Iraq. Millions dead and still affected to this day, the entire region destabilised and continuing misery that will last generations, all to line the pockets and feed the egos of already incredibly wealthy men. A true tragedy and an epic turning point in contemporary history that can in part is responsible for the current rise of Fascism in the West, which Alistair so abhors (due to increased levels of refugees/migration from the Middle East). I know Alistair sticks to his script on his involvement, as I imagine it's the only thing that lets him sleep at night, but I feel in the long run it would be better to admit what he knows deep down - that it was morally, ethically, practically, and spiritually bankrupt to support the invasion and that he should hold himself partly accountable.
If you check the historical record, “millions” is untrue. The records indicate between 100000 and 200000 depending on on which one you choose. Exaggerating a catastrophe demeans rather than enhances the criticism
Absolutely.
To say the Iraq war destabilised the Middle East is a bit of a stretch,
@@stanby2712 They said "Millions dead and still affected". Presumably those still affected are not dead. Therefore millions include both those who died as a result of the war _plus_ those who are still affected.
@@andrew30m Where did ISIS come from?
It is often tempting to conflate incompetence with malice. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Rory is definitely right. The intelligence was terrible and used in a calculated and misleading manner. Most would be evaluated as X4 or D4, unreliable source and uncorroborated information not known personally to them. Shocking that the intelligence professionals let that go into a dossier without massive caveats. And shocking that they didn't have any consequences.
It seems that most of the people involved for carried away with the moment and confirming what the boss wants to hear.
Relying on Tony Blairs 'view' and 'belief' doesn't make it any more reliable or trustworthy. I agree he had already decided and was seeking only a way forward to war, which then orchestrated the machinery confirm his thoughts and need to start a false war.
Really high quality conversation on a very polarizing topic!Chapeau gentlemen!
Alastair goes on about how they thought Saddam was developing chemical weapons and were actively using them conveniently leaves out the fact the US and UK backed the Iraqis against Iran in the 80s and yeah they knew he had chemical weapons because they helped him get and use them…
Thanks Rory!❤
You can feel our frustration.
Your user of the "F" word was NOT a swear word. It was completely apt.
You can't lay the whole war on the shoulders of one man.
It’s from this point, for me, that I lost all faith and trust in many of our institutions.