This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/8380139.stm

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
UK 'accepted' Iraq action in 2002 Bush 'hardened Blair Iraq stance'
(about 2 hours later)
The UK believed it was pointless to resist US plans for regime change in Iraq a full year before the invasion, the Iraq war inquiry has been told. Tony Blair's view on regime change in Iraq "tightened" after a private meeting with President Bush in 2002, the UK's former US ambassador has said.
Sir Christopher Meyer, UK ambassador to the US at the time, said that by March 2002 No 10 felt trying to stop this policy was a "complete waste of time". Sir Christopher Meyer said no officials were at the Bush family ranch talks - but the next day Mr Blair mentioned regime change for the first time.
But the UK told the US it should seek UN approval for any action, he added. He also said officials had been left "scrambling" for evidence of WMD while US prepared its troops for an invasion.
A meeting between Tony Blair and President Bush in Texas a month later was crucial in agreeing this, he said. He was giving evidence to the inquiry into the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Sir Christopher noted that a day after this meeting, Tony Blair mentioned the prospect of regime change for the first time in a speech. Crucial meeting
The inquiry is looking into UK involvement in Iraq between 2001 and 2009, with the first few weeks focusing on policy in the build-up to the 2003 US-led invasion. Its remit is to look into UK involvement in Iraq between 2001 and 2009, with the first few weeks focusing on policy in the build-up to the 2003 US-led invasion.
On the third day of public hearings, Sir Christopher attacked the UK-backed process of weapons inspections in the run-up to the war, saying officials had been forced to scramble for a "smoking gun" while US troops gathered.
But most attention focused on when he believed the decision to go to war had become inevitable.
Sir Christopher said the UK believed it was "pointless" to resist US plans for regime change in Iraq a full year before the invasion and speculated that the path to war was set at a meeting between the two leaders at President Bush's Texas ranch in April 2002.
WITNESSES ON THURSDAY SIR CHRISTOPHER MEYER-UK Ambassador to Washington 1997-2003 Q&A: Iraq war inquiry Analysis: tolerant or critical? How US has investigated Iraq war Iraq inquiry 'suffocated' - CleggWITNESSES ON THURSDAY SIR CHRISTOPHER MEYER-UK Ambassador to Washington 1997-2003 Q&A: Iraq war inquiry Analysis: tolerant or critical? How US has investigated Iraq war Iraq inquiry 'suffocated' - Clegg
On day three of its public hearings, the inquiry focused on UK-US relations before the war and the background to the controversial decision to invade Iraq. Critics of the war maintain this was the moment that the prime minister pledged his support for toppling Saddam Hussein.
The former ambassador said that before 9/11 the US viewed Iraq as "a grumbling appendix" but noted that regime change had been official US policy since 1998 when Congress passed the Iraq Liberation Act. Sir Christopher said no advisers were present for much of the meeting and therefore he could not be "entirely clear what degree of convergence was, if you like, signed in blood".
But he said there were "clues" in a speech given by Mr Blair the next day when he mentioned the possibility of regime change for the first time.
"When I heard that speech, I thought that this represents a tightening of the UK-US alliance and a degree of convergence on the danger that Saddam Hussein presented," he told the inquiry.
Sir Christopher, who left Washington in 2003, said Mr Blair was a "true believer in the wickedness of Saddam Hussein", his views pre-dating the election of the Bush administration.
"Sea-change""Sea-change"
But he said Washington was focused on supporting dissident groups in trying to bring about change and toughening sanctions rather than military action. Before 9/11 the US viewed Iraq as "a grumbling appendix", he said, but that policy was focused on supporting dissident groups and toughening sanctions rather than on military action.
However, he said there had been a "sea-change" in attitudes after 9/11 which the British government had been forced to react to.However, he said there had been a "sea-change" in attitudes after 9/11 which the British government had been forced to react to.
He told the panel he had received "new" instructions in March 2002 - just weeks before the meeting between Mr Blair and President Bush - from Sir David Manning, the prime minister's foreign policy's adviser, about the UK's position over Iraq. He said he had received "new" instructions in March 2002 - just weeks before the meeting between Mr Blair and President Bush - from Sir David Manning, the prime minister's foreign policy's adviser, about the UK's position over Iraq.
Downing Street's believed that with the Iraq Liberation Act and "the fact that 9/11 had happened" it was "a complete waste of time" to say that the UK cannot support regime change, said Sir Christopher. Downing Street believed that "the fact that 9/11 had happened" meant it was "a complete waste of time" to say that the UK cannot support regime change, said Sir Christopher.
He said Sir David told the Americans that although there were "powerful enough" reasons for the US to go it alone in Iraq, it was much better that they built an international coalition to get "friends and partners" on board.
Referring to a subsequent conversation he had with a leading US government official about Saddam Hussein, Sir Christopher added: "I didn't say just we are with you on regime change, now let's go get the bastard. We didn't do that. What we said 'let's do it cleverly and let's do it with some skill'. That means, apart from anything else, go the UN and get a security council resolution."
INQUIRY TIMELINE November-December: Former top civil servants, spy chiefs, diplomats and military commanders to give evidenceJanuary-February 2010: Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and other politicians expected to appear before the panel March 2010: Inquiry expected to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJuly-August 2010: Inquiry expected to resumeReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timelineINQUIRY TIMELINE November-December: Former top civil servants, spy chiefs, diplomats and military commanders to give evidenceJanuary-February 2010: Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and other politicians expected to appear before the panel March 2010: Inquiry expected to adjourn ahead of the general election campaignJuly-August 2010: Inquiry expected to resumeReport set to be published in late 2010 or early 2011 Iraq inquiry: Day-by-day timeline
He told the panel he was not at a crucial meeting at President Bush' Texas ranch in April 2002 at which the two leaders discussed Iraq. He said Sir David told Washington that although the US was "powerful enough" to go it alone in Iraq, it was much better they built an international coalition to get "friends and partners" on board.
Critics of the war maintain this was the moment that the prime minister pledged his support for toppling Saddam Hussein. Referring to a subsequent conversation he had with a leading US government official about Saddam Hussein, Sir Christopher added: "I didn't say just we are with you on regime change, now let's go get the bastard. We didn't do that. What we said 'let's do it cleverly and let's do it with some skill'. That means, apart from anything else, go the UN and get a security council resolution."
Sir Christopher said he noted a change in tone in a "sophisticated" speech Mr Blair gave the day afterwards, which he believed was the first time the prime minister had publicly mentioned regime change. 'Rumble of war'
"When I heard that speech, I thought that this represents a tightening of the UK-US alliance and a degree of convergence on the danger that Saddam Hussein presented."
'True believer'
Sir Christopher, who left Washington in 2003, said Mr Blair was a "true believer in the wickedness of Saddam Hussein", his views pre-dating the election of the Bush administration.
Addressing the period immediately leading up to war, Sir Christopher said the "unforgiving timetable" for a likely invasion, in terms of military preparations, meant any other outcome was unlikely.Addressing the period immediately leading up to war, Sir Christopher said the "unforgiving timetable" for a likely invasion, in terms of military preparations, meant any other outcome was unlikely.
He said some elements in the US administration hoped that international pressure, encapsulated in UN Security Council Resolution 1441, and the threat of force might make Saddam decide to comply or go into exile. He described how the "rumble of war" in early 2003 effectively "short-circuited" the work of UN weapons inspectors looking for weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
However, he described how the "rumble of war" in early 2003 effectively "short-circuited" the work of weapons inspectors looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They were left "scrabbling" around to try and find a "smoking gun" in a short period of time and the UK and US had never "recovered" from the fact that no WMD were found after the invasion.
The Iraq inquiry was set up by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who also chose the panel. Turning to events after the war, Sir Christopher said UK co-operation in the mission should have been contingent on a thorough post-war plan for Iraq but, instead, the UK was "taken for granted".
Mr Brown and predecessor Tony Blair are expected to be among future witnesses, with the final report due early in 2011. He contrasted Tony Blair's approach with that of one of his predecessors. "What would Margaret Thatcher have done?" he said.
"I think she would have insisted on a coherent diplomatic and political strategy and planning for after the toppling of Saddam."
The Iraq inquiry, set up by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, is due to report by the end of 2010.
Mr Brown and his predecessor Tony Blair are expected to be among future witnesses.