US imposes new sanctions on Syria over suspected chemical attackWorld April 24, 21:23
Russian businessman plans to build sailplane to fly around the globe nonstop in 5 daysScience & Space April 24, 19:50
Roscosmos excludes three cosmonauts from space teamScience & Space April 24, 19:34
Russian Foreign Ministry: Terrorists in Syria may get chemical weapons from Libya, IraqRussian Politics & Diplomacy April 24, 19:05
US not ready yet to restart arms control dialog, Russian diplomat saysRussian Politics & Diplomacy April 24, 18:57
Court recognizes Russia’s Sports Ministry as affected party in WADA whistleblower caseSport April 24, 18:48
Elephant, giraffe and wildcats found among Muscovites’ house petsSociety & Culture April 24, 17:48
Putin calls for setting apart real anti-corruption crusaders from political show-offsRussian Politics & Diplomacy April 24, 16:34
Moscow court turns down Jehovah’s Witnesses bid to fight Justice Ministry’s banWorld April 24, 16:08
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.