I really am not going to get involved in a discussion about the legal position of the Iraq war. I am not the person to do that because I am not sufficiently impartial as a lawyer about this, because it's a matter that is of interest to the person that I am closest to in the world.

In this quote, Cherie Blair, a British barrister and wife of former Prime Minister Tony Blair, explains why she would refrain from engaging in a discussion about the legal position of the Iraq war. She acknowledges that, as a lawyer, she is typically expected to provide impartial legal opinions, but she admits that the war is a highly personal issue for her because of her close relationship with her husband, who was the key figure behind the decision to invade Iraq. Blair's statement reflects her conflict of interest, as her emotions and personal connection would make it difficult for her to approach the topic in an objective or detached manner.

Cherie Blair's quote highlights the dilemma faced by those closely connected to individuals involved in controversial political or legal decisions. In this case, her husband’s role in the Iraq war makes it nearly impossible for her to provide an impartial analysis. This reflects a broader issue in law and politics, where personal stakes or relationships can cloud one's ability to engage in unbiased discussions about significant matters.

The origin of this quote is likely tied to the public scrutiny and debate surrounding the Iraq war and its legal justification. During the war, there were significant discussions about whether the conflict was lawful under international law, and Cherie Blair, as a high-profile figure, was often asked to weigh in on such matters. Her response here is a way to distance herself from those discussions, recognizing the limits of her objectivity due to her personal connections.

Ultimately, Blair’s statement underscores the challenge of maintaining professional objectivity when personal relationships are involved in politically sensitive or morally complex issues. Her willingness to acknowledge this conflict suggests a commitment to upholding her integrity as a lawyer while navigating the complex emotional and personal implications of her husband’s political decisions.