Blair: Removal of Saddam Hussein "right"

It would have been right to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein even without evidence that he had weapons of mass destruction, Tony Blair has said. The former prime minister said it was the "notion" of Saddam as a threat to the region which tilted him in favour of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Blair: Removal of Saddam Hussein "right" Without the weapons claims it would have been necessary to "use and deploy different arguments", he told the BBC. Blair is expected to face the Iraq war inquiry early next year. Speaking on BBC One's Fern Britton Meets programme, he was asked whether he would still have gone on with plans to join the US-led invasion had he known at the time that there were no WMDs. He said: "I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat." He added: "I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons still in charge, but it's incredibly difficult.. "That's why I sympathise with the people who were against [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, you know, in the end I had to take the decision." Asked whether it was the idea of Saddam having WMDs which had tilted him in favour of war, Blair said it was "the notion of him as a threat to the region of which the development of WMDs was obviously one" aspect. He added that there had been "12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject" of Iraq's weapons and that Saddam had "used chemical weapons on his own people, so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind - the threat to the region". Meanwhile, Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, backed Blair's stance. The foreign minister, a member of a government brought into being as a result of the invasion, was a senior Kurdish official during the 1990s. In 1988 Saddam attacked the Kurds in northern Iraq using chemical weapons. Zebari told the BBC: "As Iraqis who have gone through the suffering and the agony of Saddam Hussein's regime, we support Tony Blair's statement. "I believe it was worth it. I believe Saddam Hussein's regime was an affront to the international community, to the international consciousness because of the atrocities, the crimes, he has committed." But former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said Blair would not have obtained the support of the cabinet or Parliament for war if he had made these views clear at the time. Sir Menzies said: "I have no doubt whatsoever that if Blair had told his cabinet what he is now saying, he'd have found it very difficult to keep all of them - he did of course lose Robin Cook and eventually Clare Short. "But the one place he would have undoubtedly failed would have been in the House of Commons. "He would not have obtained the endorsement of the House of Commons on 18 March 2003 if he had been as frank with the House of Commons then as he appears to be willing to be frank with the BBC now." And Carol Turner of the Stop the War Coalition said it was "extraordinary" that Blair was admitting that he was prepared to tailor his arguments to fit the circumstances. "It's not a matter of applauding his honesty now; it's a matter of attacking his lack of honesty and integrity in the circumstances. "It's such arrogance, isn't it? To assume that the public, which was so overwhelmingly opposed to the war at the time will somehow accept that, oh, it's fine - he tailored his arguments to the circumstance." Blair was also asked what role his Christian faith played in the decision to go to war. He said: "I think it is important that you take that decision, as it were, on the basis of what you think is right, because that is the only way to do it. But he went on: "I think people sometimes think my religious faith played a direct part in some of those decisions; it really didn't." In September 2002 the UK government published a dossier which contained the now discredited claim that Iraq could use weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) within 45 minutes of Saddam's order. Former Joint Intelligence Committee chief Sir John Scarlett told the Iraq inquiry this week that there had been "absolutely no conscious intention to manipulate the language or to obfuscate or to create a misunderstanding as to what this might refer to". Blair is set to be the key witness to the Iraq inquiry, which is looking at the whole build-up to the war and its conduct and aftermath.

Blair: Removal of Saddam Hussein "right"

Without the weapons claims it would have been necessary to "use and deploy different arguments", he told the BBC.

Blair is expected to face the Iraq war inquiry early next year.

Speaking on BBC One's Fern Britton Meets programme, he was asked whether he would still have gone on with plans to join the US-led invasion had he known at the time that there were no WMDs.

He said: "I would still have thought it right to remove him. I mean obviously you would have had to use and deploy different arguments, about the nature of the threat."

He added: "I can't really think we'd be better with him and his two sons still in charge, but it's incredibly difficult..

"That's why I sympathise with the people who were against [the war] for perfectly good reasons and are against it now, but for me, you know, in the end I had to take the decision."

Asked whether it was the idea of Saddam having WMDs which had tilted him in favour of war, Blair said it was "the notion of him as a threat to the region of which the development of WMDs was obviously one" aspect.

He added that there had been "12 years of United Nations to and fro on this subject" of Iraq's weapons and that Saddam had "used chemical weapons on his own people, so this was obviously the thing that was uppermost in my mind - the threat to the region".

Meanwhile, Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, backed Blair's stance.

The foreign minister, a member of a government brought into being as a result of the invasion, was a senior Kurdish official during the 1990s.

In 1988 Saddam attacked the Kurds in northern Iraq using chemical weapons.

Zebari told the BBC: "As Iraqis who have gone through the suffering and the agony of Saddam Hussein's regime, we support Tony Blair's statement.

"I believe it was worth it. I believe Saddam Hussein's regime was an affront to the international community, to the international consciousness because of the atrocities, the crimes, he has committed."

But former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said Blair would not have obtained the support of the cabinet or Parliament for war if he had made these views clear at the time.

Sir Menzies said: "I have no doubt whatsoever that if Blair had told his cabinet what he is now saying, he'd have found it very difficult to keep all of them - he did of course lose Robin Cook and eventually Clare Short.

"But the one place he would have undoubtedly failed would have been in the House of Commons.

"He would not have obtained the endorsement of the House of Commons on 18 March 2003 if he had been as frank with the House of Commons then as he appears to be willing to be frank with the BBC now."

And Carol Turner of the Stop the War Coalition said it was "extraordinary" that Blair was admitting that he was prepared to tailor his arguments to fit the circumstances.

"It's not a matter of applauding his honesty now; it's a matter of attacking his lack of honesty and integrity in the circumstances.

"It's such arrogance, isn't it? To assume that the public, which was so overwhelmingly opposed to the war at the time will somehow accept that, oh, it's fine - he tailored his arguments to the circumstance."

Blair was also asked what role his Christian faith played in the decision to go to war.

He said: "I think it is important that you take that decision, as it were, on the basis of what you think is right, because that is the only way to do it.

But he went on: "I think people sometimes think my religious faith played a direct part in some of those decisions; it really didn't."

In September 2002 the UK government published a dossier which contained the now discredited claim that Iraq could use weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) within 45 minutes of Saddam's order.

Former Joint Intelligence Committee chief Sir John Scarlett told the Iraq inquiry this week that there had been "absolutely no conscious intention to manipulate the language or to obfuscate or to create a misunderstanding as to what this might refer to".

Blair is set to be the key witness to the Iraq inquiry, which is looking at the whole build-up to the war and its conduct and aftermath.