Blair's Turn To Get Grilled

(2 of 2)

was campbell the week's big news?
Everyone thought so — until another bomb dropped. A senior diplomat named David Broucher testified about a peculiar conversation he'd had with Kelly in Geneva in February, before Kelly had talked to the BBC. Kelly had told Broucher that if Britain invaded Iraq, he would "probably be found dead in the woods." Kelly was dismayed because he'd told Iraqi scientists nothing would happen if they cooperated with the U.N., and Broucher felt he was he agonizing that he had betrayed his contacts.

Even with the precise meaning of Kelly's remark uncertain, the revelation brought the investigation face to face with Kelly's searing pain. The emotional pitch will remain high at least through Thursday, when Blair is scheduled to testify.

but What do we know at this point?
Last month, Kelly, Britain's foremost expert on Iraq's weaponry, was found dead in a field near his Oxfordshire home with his wrist slit. Kelly had been the source for bbc correspondent Andrew Gilligan's story about the government "sexing up" the document, and Kelly admitted to his boss that he had met the journalist (although he was vague about what he had told Gilligan). Kelly, as a civil servant, was supposed to brief journalists on technical matters only, but he expected his confession to be kept confidential and was horrified to have his name nudged into the open by the government — a tactic Campbell blamed on the Defense Ministry, whose boss, Geoff Hoon, may end up being Downing Street's designated fall guy. Kelly was not only grilled by the Defense Ministry, but also hauled before two parliamentary committees. Lord Hutton is investigating whether Kelly's suicide was the result of undue hounding by officials, and whether the government indeed stretched the truth about WMD.

The document does nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam — JONATHAN POWELL, Blair's chief of staff

So was it all about spin after all?
Certainly the government was under huge pressure to persuade a lukewarm public about the need for war, and the dossier was continually redrafted. And Blair, it turns out, was also anxious to learn what Kelly's views were about WMD and what Kelly might say to the M.P.s.

is the BBC vindicated?
Nope. Despite the Beeb's public defense of Gilligan's story, an internal e-mail from Gilligan's boss talked about his strong but "flawed" reporting. And a bbc colleague who also interviewed Kelly complained her bosses had tried to dragoon her into corroborating Gilligan's story, which she felt attributed to Kelly things he did not know — specifically, that Campbell personally inserted the 45-minute claim. Last week, it also appeared Gilligan had tried to coach two M.P.s who were preparing to question Kelly. What's not in doubt is the bitterness of this clash between titans.

Was Kelly mistreated?
So far there is no hard evidence that Kelly was hounded by officials. But Hutton repeatedly questioned witnesses as to why Kelly had to be named at all. Their answer was that Kelly's identity was bound to come out, given the media interest, and that, if not revealed, the government would have been accused of a cover-up. Campbell admitted the naming of Kelly was poorly handled.

So where do we go from here?
The next big act unfolds when Hoon gives evidence this week; he'll have to explain why Kelly's name was leaked. But the main event is Thursday's appearance by Blair.

Could this crisis bring down Blair?
Unlikely. This is an inquiry, not a trial, so no one is heading for jail. But Blair is losing ground in the court of public opinion. A Guardian/ICM poll last week found that 6% of those surveyed trusted the government to tell the truth (34% said they trusted the BBC) and 50% believed the government deliberately embellished the dossier. It will take all of Blair's formidable powers this week to restore some of that trust.