The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
102.
That is
particularly true of the US: in many instances the approach taken
by the
UK
Government can only be understood in the context of its dialogue
with Washington
and the
evolution of US policy.
103.
The Inquiry
has not been given access to the closed official records of other
states,
except when
those documents were shared with the UK Government and so appear
in
its
files.
104.
In May 2010,
members of the Iraq Inquiry Committee visited France and the
US
for
meetings with a range of individuals, to gain a wider international
perspective on the
UK’s
involvement in Iraq over the period covered by the Inquiry and to
provide a context
for
accounts given to the Inquiry by UK witnesses. Ambassador L Paul
Bremer provided
a statement
to the Inquiry, which is published on our website.
105.
Four members
of the Iraq Inquiry Committee visited Iraq in September and
October
2010, to
receive an Iraqi perspective on the UK’s involvement in
Iraq.
106.
The
Committee’s discussions in France, the US and Iraq were not formal
evidence
sessions
and therefore records of the discussions have not been published.
The names
of the
individuals that the Committee met during those visits, who have
confirmed that
they are
content for their names to be published, are listed on the
Inquiry’s website.
107.
Most senior
members of the Bush Administration whom the Inquiry
approached
declined
the request for such a meeting but the Inquiry was nevertheless
able to
meet a
number of officials who had been closely involved with the
development and
implementation
of US policy.
108.
One of the
last activities the Inquiry completed before publishing its Report
was
the
so-called “Maxwellisation” process.
109.
In the course
of its work, the Inquiry formed judgements which are critical of
the
decisions
or actions of individuals who occupied positions of responsibility.
Although the
main focus
of this Inquiry has been on learning lessons, where the Inquiry has
reached
a critical
view it has expressed it frankly. Such views can be found
throughout this Report.
110.
When the
Inquiry has felt it necessary to be critical, it has sought to be
fair to
the
individual in question. Fairness requires individuals to be given
the opportunity to
respond to
potential criticism. That is the purpose of the process often
referred to as
“Maxwellisation”.
111.
The Inquiry
has not criticised any individual who has not given evidence to it.
All
those who
gave evidence did so in accordance with the terms of the Witness
Protocol,
paragraph
10 of which says:
18