I’VE never met Tony Blair, so I can’t know for sure what kind of character he is. Maybe he loves his wife and children. Maybe they dote on him. I can’t judge him on that. But I can judge him for what he’s done and said in public life. And what he’s not done. And not said. And contrary to the headline of the Mail on Sunday yesterday, Tony Blair has not said “I’m sorry” about waging war on Iraq.

No, Tony is surfing the talk-show sofas ahead of the long-overdue publication of the Chilcot report – and getting his neb in first.

He’s sorry that the “intelligence was wrong”. But he’s not sorry that he doctored that intelligence to frighten people into supporting a pre-emptive invasion. He’s not sorry that he did everything he could to help George Bush carve up the Middle East on behalf of his Texan oil tycoons. He’s just sorry that they failed.

He’s not sorry he defied international law. And he’s definitely NOT sorry for blasting 1.4 million people to smithereens – one in 20 Iraqis – to achieve his goal of toppling Saddam Hussein.

He’s sorry they didn’t quite get the aftermath right. Well, duh… that has to be the understatement of the century. On top of those killed, another 4.2 million people were injured and 4.5 million turned into refugees. Water supplies, sewage systems, hospital care and education were wrecked. Birth defects have soared through the ceiling, while life expectancy has sunk below the floor.

Iraq in the 1990s had the best universities in Western Asia, according to American author David Swanson. It now sits at the bottom of the region’s league table for literacy, with an 80 per cent fall in the number of teachers in Baghdad. And now we have the terrifying rise of Daesh, the gang of torturers, rapists and murderers that has flourished amid the chaos left by Blair and his Texan buddy.

For Tony Blair, the aftermath of the Iraq war has been ever so slightly more bearable. He’s bought a country mansion for £5.75 million. He’s set up companies with multimillion-pound turnovers. He’s amassed a personal wealth estimated in 2012 at £80 million and growing.

A few months ago, the patron saint of New Labour even tried to charge £330,0000 – £275 a second – for a 20-minute speech on hunger. But before he arrived in his private jet to deliver a few platitudes for third of a million pounds, the Swedish organisers pulled the plug in protest at his sky-high fee.

Those who still justify the Iraq war pretend that it all went wrong because of unforeseen complications that appeared from nowhere, like lighting bolts from a clear blue sky. Nonsense. There were warnings aplenty in the run-up to the invasion.

In 2002, an editorial in the Scottish Socialist Voice predicted it would cost up to half a million innocent lives to bring down Saddam Hussein, and that the war would eventually turn into a 21st-century Vietnam. Such warnings were batted away by Tony Blair like a virtual opponent in a Wii tennis match.

He refused to listen to the wise heads of the millions on the streets, while lapping up the flattery of an American president who once said: “I’ve heard he’s been called Bush’s poodle. He’ s bigger than that.”

Blair was a Prime Minister who spun his way into office, spun his way to war; and is now spinning like a tornado to avoid being held to account for his reckless grandiosity.

Does he sleep at night? Do pictures of torched and smoking bodies of children not pervade his comfortable bedroom? Or maybe he’s one of that small band of people, massively over-represented in positions of power, who have no conscience.

But what of the others who went along with it? Where are their apologies? Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling, Jim Murphy, Jack Straw, John Reid, Geoff Hoon, and many many more. If anyone thinks Labour has moved on, check out the speeches and voting record on the Iraq war of Tom Watson, Labour’s current UK Deputy Leader.

Yes, some have backtracked. Alistair Darling admitted under pressure during the referendum campaign that if they could put the calendar back to 2002 they probably wouldn’t have invaded Iraq. Was that because the war was wrong? Because it was illegal? Because it was based on a lie? Because millions died? Or because it all went badly wrong and consequently damaged some political reputations?

People like Darling might regain some respect if they’d only speak out honestly and fully about their own roles. Did they suspend all critical faculties because they trusted Blair? Or, like their then leader, were they up to their necks in deceit? And if they weren’t, isn’t it time to discard any residual loyalty for the sake of justice for the millions of ruined lives?

Is it not high time they all owned up, apologised and sought redemption?

I don’t really have any hope for Blair, who seems destined to defend to his dying breath the killing and maiming of millions.

Chilcot surely will confirm what we all knew in 2002: Iraq was a war that some people decided was going to happen, weapons of mass destruction or not. It was always about Western political and economic domination of an oil-rich region.

But what Chilcot will never be able to illuminate is the psychology of powerful individuals who managed to convince themselves, and others, that dropping bombs on babies was the right thing to do.


Blair’s Iraq war TV apology rejected as spin before Chilcot


The National View: Blair is in damage limitation mode as Chilcot report looms