Tony Blair has apologised for aspects of the Iraq War, sparking claims of attempted "spin" ahead of the Chilcot Inquiry findings.
The former prime minister used a US television interview to express regret over the failure to plan properly for the aftermath of the 2003 toppling of Saddam Hussein and the false intelligence used to justify it.
"I apologise for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong," he told CNN.
"I also apologise for some of the mistakes in planning and, certainly, our mistake in our understanding of what would happen once you removed the regime."
Asked by host Fareed Zakaria if the Iraq War was "the principal cause" of the rise of Islamic State, he was reported by the Mail on Sunday to have conceded: 'I think there are elements of truth in that."
He added: "Of course you can't say those of us who removed Saddam in 2003 bear no responsibility for the situation in 2015."
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon accused the ex-PM of starting to prepare the ground for expected criticisms when the long-delayed report of the Chilcot Inquiry is finally published.
"The Blair spin operation begins but the country still awaits the truth," the Scottish National Party leader posted on Twitter.
"The delay to Chilcot report is a scandal."
No date has yet been given for the release of the final conclusions - more than six years after the inquiry was set up by then prime minister Gordon Brown with an assurance it would take a year.
The process was severely delayed by a process known as "Maxwellisation", under which those who may face criticism - believed to include Mr Blair - are given the opportunity to respond before publication.
Relatives of soldiers killed in the conflict have threatened legal action if a date is not fixed soon.
A spokeswoman for the former PM said: "Tony Blair has always apologised for the intelligence being wrong and for mistakes in planning. He has always also said, and says again here, that he does not however think it was wrong to remove Saddam.
"He did not say the decision to remove Saddam in 2003 'caused ISIS' and pointed out that ISIS was barely heard of at the end of 2008, when al Qaida was basically beaten.
"He went on to say in 2009, Iraq was relatively more stable. What then happened was a combination of two things: there was a sectarian policy pursued by the government of Iraq, which were mistaken policies.
"But also when the Arab Spring began, ISIS moved from Iraq into Syria, built themselves from Syria and then came back into Iraq.
"All of this he has said before."
Lord Blunkett - who was home secretary at the time of the decision to join the military action - said he had sought assurances in vain from Mr Blair over the planning for the aftermath.
"Tony was not able to say what was going to happen when combat operations were over. He just decided to trust Cheney and Rumsfeld," he told the Mail on Sunday - referring to the then US vice president and defence secretary.
"With the benefit of hindsight, we now know that they had decided to embark on the complete de-Ba'athification of Saddam's Iraq by dismantling the entire government infrastructure.
"This led to the disintegration of any form of functioning government, creating a complete power vacuum. Terrorists infiltrated Iraq and stirred discontent.
'I am not seeking to scapegoat Tony Blair; we were all collectively to blame for deluding ourselves into believing that we had much greater sway over Washington," he said.
If Sir John Chilcot did not quickly release an interim copy of his findings, he woud "risk his entire exercise being entirely discredited", he added.
Former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell - due shortly to take up a seat in the House of Lords - said: "No matter what Tony Blair says or any criticisms there will be of him in the Chilcot Inquiry report, people have long since made up their minds.
"His partial acknowledgement that the military action against Saddam Hussein has made some contribution to instability in the Middle East will do nothing to change public opinion that his was a major error of judgment.
"The inevitable truth is that Iraq is his legacy and it will be his epitaph."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel