Previous page | Contents | Next page
7  |  Conclusions: Pre-conflict strategy and planning
346.  Asked if “a war in Iraq would aggravate the threat from whatever source to
the United Kingdom”, Baroness Manningham-Buller stated that that was the view
communicated by the JIC Assessments.168
347.  Baroness Manningham-Buller subsequently added that if Ministers had read the
JIC Assessments they could “have had no doubt” about that risk.169 She said that by the
time of the July 2005 attacks in London:
“… an increasing number of British-born individuals … were attracted to the ideology
of Usama Bin Laden and saw the West’s activities in Iraq and Afghanistan as
threatening their fellow religionists and the Muslim world.”
348.  Asked whether the judgement that the effect of the invasion of Iraq had increased
the terrorist threat to the UK was based on hard evidence or a broader assessment,
Baroness Manningham-Buller replied:
“I think we can produce evidence because of the numerical evidence of the number
of plots, the number of leads, the number of people identified, and the correlation of
that to Iraq and statements of people as to why they were involved … So I think the
answer to your … question: yes.”170
349.  In its request for a statement, the Inquiry asked Mr Blair if he had read the JIC
Assessment of 10 February 2002, and what weight he had given to it when he decided
to take military action.171
350.  In his statement Mr Blair wrote:
“I was aware of the JIC Assessment of 10 February that the Al Qaida threat to the
UK would increase. But I took the view then and take the same view now that to
have backed down because of the threat of terrorism would be completely wrong.
In any event, following 9/11 and Afghanistan we were a terrorist target and, as recent
events in Europe and the US show, irrespective of Iraq, there are ample justifications
such terrorists will use as excuses for terrorism.”172
The UK’s relationship with the US
351.  The UK’s relationship with the US was a determining factor in the Government’s
decisions over Iraq.
352.  It was the US Administration which decided in late 2001 to make dealing with the
problem of Saddam Hussein’s regime the second priority, after the ousting of the Taliban
168 Public hearing, 20 July 2010, page 31.
169 Public hearing, 20 July 2010, page 33.
170 Public hearing, 20 July 2010, pages 33-34.
171 Inquiry request for a witness statement, 13 December 2010, Qs 11c and 11d page 7.
172 Statement, 14 January 2011, page 16.
617
Previous page | Contents | Next page