Iraq Violence Not Caused By ’03 Invasion Says Tony Blair; What He Suggests

Iraq is currently under attack by Al Qaeda-linked ISIS forces, who have seized two major cities and are closing in on Baghdad, but former British Prime Minister Tony Blair – now an envoy to the Middle East – says that the 2003 invasion is not to blame. He made his case in the form of an eight page essay, pointing out what he believes is – and is not – to blame for the Iraq violence.

Related articles in the Inquisitr relay that hundreds of U.S. civilian contractors are reportedly trapped by ISIS forces and that Iranian forces are confirmed to have moved into Iraq, ostensibly to help defend Baghdad from ISIS forces. U.S. President Barack Obama has made it clear that he will not send ground troops, though he is considering other military options. One can only assume that Britain will follow suit, despite escalation of violence in Iraq.

Blair called the suggestion that the U.S. and U.K.-led invasion that removed Saddam Hussein from power led to the Iraq violence we are seeing now “bizarre.” According to a report on British Channel 4 News, Blair said:

“It is a bizarre reading of the cauldron that is the Middle East today to claim that but for the removal of Saddam we would not have a crisis. The fact is that as a result of the way these societies have developed and because Islamism of various descriptions became the focal point of opposition to oppression, the removal of the dictatorship is only the beginning not the end of the challenge. Once the regime changes, then out come pouring all the tensions – tribal, ethnic and of course above all religious; and the rebuilding of the country, with functioning institutions and systems of government, becomes incredibly hard.”

While Tony Blair made clear that he did not believe that the 2003 invasion – which occurred during his time as prime minister – was at fault for the violence in Iraq, there are several things he pointed to that he believes have paved the way for ISIS to come in and spread sectarian violence. These include the failure of the Maliki government to bring the various ethnic and religious groups within Iraq together and the failure of the West to respond consistently to violence in other Middle Eastern countries.

One of the hot spots Blair pointed to is Syria. According to Tony Blair, the West’s failure to support moderate rebels in Syria has allowed radical Islamic militants to move into northern Iraq and to control wide swaths of territory. According to a Yahoo News report, Blair used what he considers western failures in Syria to suggest that the U.S. should consider some form of military strike to deal with the Iraq violence. The former prime minister is quoted saying:

“(Extremist groups in Syria and Iraq) should be targeted, in coordination and with the agreement of the Arab countries. By all means argue about the wisdom of earlier decisions. But it is the decisions now that will matter. The choices are all pretty ugly, it is true. But for three years we have watched Syria descend into the abyss and as it is going down, it is slowly but surely wrapping its cords around us pulling us down with it. We have to put aside the differences of the past and act now to save the future. Where the extremists are fighting, they have to be countered hard, with force.”

Tony Blair is further quoted by Channel 4 News pointing out the inconsistency with which the west has dealt with violence in Libya, Syria and Iraq:

“(Former Libyan dictator) Gaddafi, who in 2003 had given up his WMD and cooperated with us in the fight against terrorism, is removed by us on the basis he threatens to kill his people but (Syrian dictator) Assad, who actually kills his people on a vast scale including with chemical weapons, is left in power.”

Tony Blair has gone on record that he supports the further use of force to quell the Iraq violence, though not necessarily sending in ground troops – a suggestion that echoes military possibilities Barack Obama has made clear are possible. The BBC quotes him saying:

“Where the extremists are fighting, they have to be countered hard, with force. This does not mean Western troops as in Iraq. There are masses of responses we can make short of that. But they need to know that wherever they’re engaged in terror, we will be hitting them.”

What do you think the U.S. and U.K. should do in response to the Iraq involvement? Do you agree with Tony Blair that the west needs to deal forcibly with the forces causing the violence in Iraq, should we let the Iraqis and Iranians deal with it, or should we have some other response?

[Image via Shutterstock]