Prowling Amur tiger nabbed near Russian Far Eastern city of VladivostokSociety & Culture October 27, 13:55
Russian scientists create "smart foil" for mounting industrial transducersScience & Space October 27, 13:54
Caspian Flotilla ships return from long-distance voyageMilitary & Defense October 27, 13:33
Russian senator urges probe into children death in Syria’s IdlibRussian Politics & Diplomacy October 27, 13:32
Putin awards Emir Kusturica with Order of FriendshipSociety & Culture October 27, 13:20
Moscow court upholds arrest of Ukrainian accused of spyingWorld October 27, 13:18
UN-OPCW report on Syrian chemical attacks 'gives no ground for sanctions'Russian Politics & Diplomacy October 27, 13:00
Press review: Russia-US jointly freeing Raqqa and falling alcohol importsPress Review October 27, 13:00
Launch of Soyuz MS-03 space vehicle to ISS postponed till Nov 17Science & Space October 27, 12:18
LONDON, July 6. /TASS/. The legal basis for Britain’s decision to go to war with Iraq in 2003 was "far from satisfactory," chairman of the inquiry into the conflict John Chilcot said on Wednesday.
"We have, however, concluded that the circumstances in which it was decided that there was a legal basis for military action were far from satisfactory," Chilcot said presenting the report that took seven years to prepare.
Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair was warned about the threat of increased al-Qaeda activity as a result of Iraq invasion in 2003, Chilcot said.
"Mr Blair had been advised that an invasion of Iraq was expected to increase the threat to the UK and UK interests from Al Qaida and its affiliates," Chilcot said.
The legal basis for Britain’s decision to go to war with Iraq in 2003 was "far from satisfactory," he continued. "We have, however, concluded that the circumstances in which it was decided that there was a legal basis for military action were far from satisfactory," Chilcot noted.
"It is now clear that policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. They were not challenged, and they should have been," he stressed.
"Despite explicit warnings, the consequences of the invasion were underestimated," he continued. "We have also concluded that the judgements about the severity of the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction - WMD - were presented with a certainty that was not justified," he said.