Alistair Campbell

The row between the BBC and the British government over the death of weapons expert Dr. David Kelly has become exactly what the media-obsessed Blair government wants - a weapon of mass distraction, a media circus that dominates the UK headlines, diverting attention away from the fact that still no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq and the country is plunging even deeper into turmoil.

The Hutton Inquiry has yet to unmask any significant developments in the story so far, and probably never will. This is perhaps because the story is simple and tragic. A government employee, a knowledgeable expert in the field of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), has grave doubts and concerns over the Iraq dossier and leaks his views. He had every right to do so. When a country was about to go to war on the pretext of Iraq’s alleged possession of WMD, it was his duty and responsibility to tell the public his doubts on the matter, blowing the whistle on Blair’s spurious claim that Saddam Hussein had WMD that could have been “activated within 45 minutes.”

But the Hutton Inquiry is a sideshow. Win or lose, the 45 minutes claim and the death of Dr. Kelly were never the central issue to the British public. Why is this still being debated? Whether or not the UK government “sexed up” the report on Iraq, the British people already know now that Iraq posed no imminent threat to the UK and America. This is surely enough to answer the question whether the public was misled and whether the report was exaggerated.

Conclusively, the Hutton Inquiry will not solve much or answer many important questions and can have no possible result that will be relevant to the real issues: Where are the weapons of mass destruction that posed a “serious” and “current” threat? How to overcome the awful disorder and chaos created by the US-UK led regime-change in Iraq?

In fact, Blair and Bush moved forward into war before knowing where it would lead them. They did not realize that it would be difficult for them to establish a totally new society with new political and social systems. The result was a broken up society where there is no law, no army, and no police force. It is a big crisis for the Iraqi people, and also a crisis for the British and American governments. And now, establishing a lasting and stable peace in Iraq is proving more difficult than winning the conflict was.

Endless strife caused by a lack of concept, understanding and ability on the coalition’s part, and fuelled by religious, political and ethnic divisions, is now reigning in Iraq.

The war-ravaged, lawless country, where some have been without water and electricity for more than 5 months, has seen three major terrorist attacks - the atrocity at the Jordanian embassy, the lethal truck bombing at the UN building in Baghdad, which killed leading UN envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, and the car bombing which killed at least 80 people and a leading Shiite politician near the revered Tomb of Ali in Najaf, one of Islam’s holiest sites.

Over the weekend, at least 2,000 people crowded the streets of Baghdad denouncing the Baath party of former leader Saddam Hussein and shouting anti-American slogans. The general consensus among Iraqis seems to be that the US troops are not doing enough to secure their holy sites, which may inevitably lead to a ferocious and overwhelming anti-American backlash.

With each bomb being more powerful and deadly than the preceding one, all attacks are aimed at destabilizing Iraq and delaying the return of stability to this seemingly lawless nation.

The nature of these recent attacks strongly suggests that either rival Shiite factions vying for power, remnants of the ousted Baath party or militants affiliated with Al-Qaeda (or extremist groups linked to the network) are responsible for the Najaf blast.

In the context of Bush and Blair’s war on terrorism, it is difficult to imagine a worse scenario than that of extremist groups linked to Al-Qaeda being able to effectively operate in the country. Before the war, Al-Qaeda was unable to gain ground or support in Iraq - and no definite link has been proved between the secular rule of former leader Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden’s extremist group.

The recent arrest of Saudi Arabians - alleged to be involved in the Najaf car bombing - highlights the fact that Iraq is in danger of becoming a magnet for Arab fighters from across the Middle East who are determined to launch “jihad” against the oppressive superpower.

But as the Hutton Inquiry continues in London - away from the terror and poverty of Iraq, the whole debate over the course of the last three weeks has been shifted away from the rights and wrongs of the war, the weapons of mass destruction that have yet to be discovered more than five months after the war began, and the problems faced by the Iraqi people; and the quarrel has become solely about the way the Blair government handles intelligence information in its possession. Media manipulation and “spin over substance” have been an important weapon in the arsenal of New Labour.

Alistair Campbell, Blair’s friend and communications director, spun out of Downing Street in a media hurricane on Friday, August 29; but the dust which this creates must not blind the public’s eyes from the issues at hand.

Campbell denied at the Hutton Inquiry that he had been involved in “sexing up” the dossier for war; yet, he admitted intervening to tell contributors to the report to tone the rhetoric down. This shows that he had the power to influence the dossier in the first instance; and it does seem though that the dossier became “sexier” after the spin doctor’s intervention.

But the significance of the resignation of king of spin Alistair Campbell the day after Tony Blair gave evidence at the Hutton Inquiry lies in its timing. If it hadn’t been for Campbell’s resignation, the newspapers would have been full of analyses of the Prime Minister’s performance following a poll that was conducted on the preceding day showing that the public’s trust in Blair had fallen dramatically.

Instead, the news is now overflowing with stories on Campbell, the propagandist and the driving force behind the British media’s “spin-over-substance,” who had not been elected by anyone. The timing of his resignation has provided Blair with a media shield, deflecting attention from him.

Indeed, the comments that David Kelly made in February to a Foreign Office official that he would be found “dead in the woods” if Iraq were invaded have led some to question his death.

Thus far the picture is this: Dr Kelly undoubtedly did commit suicide and it was because of the strain of his underhand public exposure. He probably agreed with the decision to go to war, but he felt that the dossier had been “sexed up” as he was apparently noted for his fondness of accuracy.

In every way, though, it was wrong, and quite unnecessary, to name him as the source for the BBC report. The government should take full responsibility for this mistake and, most importantly, it should also take full accountability for the current situation in Iraq.

Britain’s involvement in the Iraq war has been the most disturbing, arrogant action by a government in my lifetime - and it also has the potential to be one of the most important.

Political apathy of the disinterested masses has reigned for too long and now has resulted in a war with another sovereign state against the wish of the majority of Britain’s people.

At best, it seems that the British public were duped or tricked; at worst, lied to by its government. The legacy may well be that the British as a whole may start taking politics more seriously, looking through the spin and distraction, and becoming more mistrusting of their seemingly culpable government. Still, this will not solve the chaos reigning in Iraq, neither will it bring back the near 7,000 innocent Iraqis killed in the name of their own “liberation.”