Barry: Time to lay blame for Iraq bloodshed

Jun 17 2009 by Barry Gibson, Huddersfield Daily Examiner

I’VE heard these words so many times from Roger Whittaker at Huddersfield Coroners’ Court: “I’m not here to apportion blame.”

Each time he begins an inquest, Mr Whittaker explains to any grieving relatives present that, whatever else happens that day, there will be no pointing of fingers.

That’s not the job of the coroner, though there are times when I sit there with my notebook and wish that it was.

But at least inquests are held in public, which is more than can be said for the Iraq War inquiry which Gordon Brown announced in Parliament this week.

It will meet in secret – sorry, private. There won’t be any nosy journalists to report its proceedings.

But, just like an inquest, there will be no apportioning of blame either. As the Prime Minister told the House of Commons on Monday: “the primary objective of the committee will be to identify lessons learned. The committee will not set out to apportion blame or consider issues of civil or criminal liability.”

Well, that seems fine to me.

After all, why would anyone want to “apportion blame” following a war which has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people? What possible reason could there be to “consider issues of civil or criminal liability” after a conflict which has forced millions of Iraqis to flee their homes?

No, far better to “learn lessons” so that the next utterly unnecessary war is conducted a little more efficiently.

With so much blood spilt – the vast majority of it Iraqi – it seems to me that it is absolutely right that blame should be apportioned, that the guilty should be called to account. A lesson-learning exercise just doesn’t cut it.

Listening to Mr Brown’s statement on this inquiry, I almost thought he was referring to another war. Are there two countries in the world called Iraq?