British Premier Tony Blair chose to make himself President Bush’s most faithful ally in the invasion of Iraq. On the face of it, Blair’s slavish devotion, even now when it is apparent that Bush’s poorly considered Iraqi policy is failing badly, has earned him little in the way of loyalty in return. In the 2003 invasion, two US A10 tank-buster aircraft opened up on a British armored column, killing one soldier and seriously injuring four others. In the fog of war, the somewhat oxymoronically named “friendly fire” incidents do occur from time to time. However, what has made this particular deadly US mistake different is the casual and uncooperative way in which the Pentagon has handled the incident.
A British inquest into the death of the soldier, Lance Cpl. Matty Hull, has just concluded that his death was an “unlawful killing.” The coroner conducting the enquiry has been highly critical of the reluctance of US authorities to release important information. In particular, cockpit film from the American aircraft was initially said not to exist. Then it was not only admitted to be available but also that the British Defense Ministry had a copy. The Pentagon, however, refused to allow the film’s release on the grounds of security. When a British newspaper somehow got hold of the film and published a transcript of the conversations that took place between the pilots and their ground control, the Americans were forced to agree that the footage could formally be put into the public domain. They refused, at the same time, to have any US personnel involved in the attack travel to the UK to give evidence to the coroner. Their stance was that they had already conducted their own enquiry and had concluded that the “friendly fire” was a tragic error for which no one was to blame. The British are piqued that their American allies have been so unwilling to furnish all the necessary evidence in order to establish the exact course of events. The extent of British government annoyance and frustration has become clear following a statement from London’s Constitutional Affairs Minister Harriet Harman. She expressed her disappointment that, despite assurances that British inquests were not criminal investigations and that no US serviceman faced charges or imprisonment, the Americans still refused to help out with the enquiry.
This lack of cooperation clearly raised a question in the coroner’s mind about what other evidence the Pentagon might be trying to conceal. This doubtless prompted him to deliver the “unlawful killing” verdict. For most Britons, deeply opposed to Blair’s involvement in Bush’s Iraq war and the subsequent loss of the peace, this will add to the conviction that the UK’s participation has earned it little more than warm words of appreciation from the Americans. Bush had the power to intervene and have US servicemen give evidence. He did not use it and so displayed precious little practical gratitude in exchange for Blair’s slavish loyalty.
