On the Iraq inquiries
Sir: Lest myths become accepted as facts, may I correct two aspects of John Kampfner’s article (‘The secret Iraq deal’, 27 June) about the Iraq Intelligence Review, which I chaired.
First, a myth has grown up that the Review’s criticisms of the government were originally more trenchant but were watered down following government pressure. The facts are that, as fair procedure required, we gave those affected by our criticisms an opportunity to respond and make some verbal amendments in response to their representations. But I do not recall any instances in which these affected the substance of the criticisms.
Second, John Kampfner reports me as saying at the launch of the Review report that I did not hold any single individual responsible for the failures of intelligence and that I later regretted my ‘timidity’. I stand by the remark which Kampfner quotes and have not subsequently regretted it.
Butler
House of Lords, London SW1
The British in Basra
Sir: May I refute your assertion (Leading article, 27 June) that ‘Basra had to be liberated from the Shiite militias… by Iraqi and American forces in an operation that the British were not even informed about until it was underway.’ At the time the operation was launched, I was commanding the British brigade in Basra and standing in as divisional commander. I had spent part of the preceding week in Baghdad helping Iraqis prepare to present a three-step plan to defeat the militia in Basra to their prime minister. The corps’ desire was for the operation not to start until the battle against al-Qa’eda in Iraq had progressed further. However, following his briefing, Mr Maliki decided he would go straight to Step 3 of the Plan, starting the following day (Sunday, 23 March 2008). I knew the moment it was announced to the corps commander. I was back in Basra to meet Mr Maliki when he arrived to take charge of the operation on the Monday, and as British soldiers began to deploy to Basra city locations.
The first Iraqi units involved in fighting during Monday and Tuesday had a hard time of it, but the situation turned decisively with the deployment of American and then British Military Transition Teams (on the Wednesday after essential equipment had been issued).
In truth, the success of the operation was determined by a very changed situation; the Basrawis wanted the Iraqi army to rid them of the militia, the Iraqi army was undertaking a mission they had been set by their PM, and they had invited us along to help. If we had not been able to turn the situation round in these circumstances we would deserve your criticism, but we did.
Brigadier Julian Free CBE
Formerly Commander 4th Mechanized Brigade
Suspect list
Sir: In a notable letter to the Spectator in November 1983, Kingsley Amis rode to the rescue of another novelist, Elizabeth Taylor, who had been patronised as being unimportant. ‘Importance isn’t important,’ he wrote. ‘Good writing is.’ What he would have made of something so self-consciously grand as 50 ‘essential’ films hardly bears thinking about.
The selections were designed to start an argument, so here goes. You chose the wrong Bergman, the wrong Woody Allen, and the wrong Preston Sturges. There was only one film apiece by Billy Wilder and John Ford, and not even one by Robert Altman. Despite placing a premium on ‘wit, Britishness and intelligence’ there was no room for Bringing up Baby, All About Eve, His Girl Friday, Strangers on a Train or Goodbye Mr Chips. There was no Chinatown and, unbelievably, no Third Man!
Each to his own, they say, though it is a bit worrying to see a verb like ‘downplay’ in the Spectator. It is also a bit odd to read that Apocalypse Now (Number 2 — you are joking!) has ‘a richness of literary reference that is appreciated only by those sufficiently addicted to use the freeze-frame button’. Au contraire, Kurtz’s bookshelf is there for all to see. Thanks to clever-clogs Coppola and his lingering lens, nobody can possibly miss it.
As for The Night of the Hunter being ‘an eccentric, provocative choice’ as the most essential film of all, in view of what had come before it was a bit tame. A really provocative choice would have been Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. In the end, any ‘greatest’ list comes down to one question: where is Singin’ in the Rain? According to your judges there are 31 movies more ‘essential’. There aren’t. ‘Quite simply,’ as Mr Hoskin likes to write, there isn’t one.
Michael Henderson
London W13
Ancestral ties
Sir: Following the letter from Lt Col N.J. Ridout (27 June) about meeting a woman who could remember Waterloo, I’d like to point out that my French elder sister, now aged 71, recalls that she was once told by a 102-year-old aunt that her grandfather, as a child, was a page at Louis XV’s court (1715-1774).
N. Beaumont
Surrey
Advice to tourists
Sir: I was surprised not to see an acknowledgement of Gerard Hoffnung, the founder of ‘misinformation’ (Competition, 27 June). His advice to tourists visiting Britain included such gems as: ‘When entering a railway carriage be sure to shake hands with all the occupants before taking your seat’; ‘If driving ignore any signs saying “Keep Right” or “Keep Left”, these are merely political slogans’; and my favourite: ‘Be sure to try the famous echo in the reading room at the British Museum’.
Terry Walsh
West Chiltington, West Sussex
An Apology
In John Kampfner’s article, we stated that Alastair Campbell prevailed upon Lord Butler to tone down important sections of his report on intelligence used in the build-up to the Iraq war. We are happy to accept that this is not so, and that Mr Campbell, who left Downing Street in 2003, played no role in relation to the Butler inquiry, to which he was not a witness. We apologise to him for our error and have agreed to make a donation to the fund he has established for Leukaemia Research in honour of Henry Hodge.
Comments