Tony Blair is being forced to answer questions before the British Inquiry into the Iraq War and you can watch his testimony live on CSPAN. What’s amusing is that Blair is trying to argue that in the cabinet meeting where they decided to help invade Iraq, the question of its legality was just one part of the consideration about whether it was “the right thing to do.” In other words, it was possible to be the right thing to do even though it was patently illegal. I think that’s a ripe area for debate. For example, our intervention in Kosovo wasn’t authorized by the United Nations Security Council because the Russians sided with the Serbs. So, how do you distinguish between Kosovo and Iraq in a legal sense? Or should you?
Perhaps a better question is why the Brits feel comfortable holding Blair and his government accountable for their actions while it’s unthinkable that any such thing would happen to Bush, Cheney, and their decision makers. Why is that?
