Clare Short’s appearance at the Chilcot Inquiry was in barnstorming contrast to the dour and deflective testimonies so far. But her plaudits in the press have glossed over what amounts to a blatant attempt to rewrite her embarrassing history.

For those of us who rubbed our hands at the prospect of new revelations at the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War, proceedings have been disappointing, pickings slim.

For those of us who rubbed our hands at the prospect of new revelations at the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War, proceedings have been disappointing, pickings slim.

But following the well-rehearsed and deflective performances of key decision-makers involved in the run-up to the 2003 invasion, Clare Short burst onto the scene on Tuesday with an explosive appearance.

Claiming that she was “conned” by a “deceitful”  Tony Blair into supporting the war, the former International Development Secretary proceeded to attack just about anyone and everyone who was around her at the time, including her former master, the cabinet, the Attorney General, the Chief of the Defence Staff and the US government.

The three-hour performance not only earned a round of applause from spectators sat in the public gallery, but praise from all corners of the press. The Sun called her “a brave woman, brutally honest”, while the Guardian’s political sketch writer Simon Hoggart said that it was the “most entertaining evidence we’ve had yet.” His opposite number at the Daily Mail, Quentin Letts, enthused: “Finally someone’s giving it a bit of welly, boy her session was fun.”

But like many who preceded her at the inquiry, Short has reinterpreted and repackaged her role in the run-up to war, and the media and public’s judgment must not be clouded by their insatiable appetite to give those they hold responsible for the ensuing mess – namely Blair and his close associates – a black eye.

Continue reading ‘Short shrift’