Britannia Radio

With Friends Like Gaddafi Who Needs Enemies?

From the desk of A. Millar on Tue, 2009-09-01 09:21

The release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi from his Scottish jail just over a week ago was greeted by open suspicion and contempt by the British public. Al-Megrahi’s prostate cancer, along with a hefty dose of “compassion,” was the official version, read out by Kenny MacAskill, Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Justice. Accordingly, al-Megrahi – who was convicted of murdering 270 people (mostly Americans) by blowing up the Pan Am Flight 103 over the town of Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 – was going home to die. The decision, MacAskill said at the time, was his, and his alone.
 
Much to the embarrassment of the Scottish and British governments, a few days ago, Gaddafi’s son Saif al-Islam strongly implied that the release had been down to a deal about oil. The Times of London has since corroborated this, revealing that the decision had been taken two years ago, when discussions between Libya and energy giant BP, aimed at securing a multi-billion dollar, oil exploration agreement, had stalled. Once al-Megrahi’s release was put on the table, an agreement between Libya and BP was reached.
 
According to one newly leaked letter from Justice Secretary Jack Straw to MacAskill, the British government believed it to be “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom.”
 
How many in the government think that now?
 
Before his release, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton publicly called for al-Meghari to serve the remainder of his sentence in Scotland. Perhaps, this might seem a bit rich, considering the Obama administration’s enthusiasm for closing Guantanamo Bay and downplaying the terrorist threat, but the Democrats have their finger on the pulse in this instance. Many Americans are simply enraged at the decision to free al-Megrahi, and websites have already appeared, calling for US citizens to boycott British goods.
 
Boycott’s don’t last. But, reputations do. Scotland’s and Britain’s have been badly damaged. Prime minister Gordon Brown – though characteristically AWOL as accusations began to fly – sent Gaddafi a letter, imploring him to treat al-Megrahi’s arrival in Libya “with sensitivity.” It was all supposed to be low key. Instead al-Megrahi was treated to a hero’s welcome.
 
And like Saif al-Islam’s comments, the fanfare that met al-Megrahi seemed designed to embarrass the British government as much as possible.
 
Gaddafi is no ally, but a cunning individual with a keen sense for manipulating the West’s weakest points. “Europe is in a predicament, and so is America,” he once said, expressing his delight at the possibility of an Islamic Europe. For Gaddafi, the predicaments of others are opportunities to exploit. 
 
Last year, when his youngest son, Hannibal, was arrested in Switzerland for mistreating two of his domestic servants, two Swiss nationals were arrested in Libya – apparently in retaliation – although soon released. Libya then withdrew $7 billion from Swiss bank accounts, cut economic ties, and stopped supplying Switzerland with oil. This bullying had the desired effect, and the Swiss president was soon flying to Libya, to apologize for his country’s “unjust” arrest.
 
The al-Megrahi affair has now left the Scottish and British governments looking like amateurs, outclassed by the same tin pot dictator. That it has placed even greater strain on the “special relationship” is deeply regrettable, because with friends like Gaddafi who needs enemies?

 A. Millar Part I

Submitted by traveller on Tue, 2009-09-01 23:16.

Please find my reaction here to your article.

THE CRIMINAL CRIMINALISATION OF LIBYA

Reading now since years about the “terrorist” Libyans and their “mad” dictator, I decided that enough is enough.

Please find my reaction to your article here.

Together with my friend Yves Bonnet, ex-director general of the French DST under Mitterand, we decided to publish a short version of the chapter covering Lockerbie in his new book about Khaddaffi. I just translated and shortened the text for this blog.

21 December 1988 a Boeing 747 exploded in flight over the Scottish town of Lockerbie. Most of the passengers were US military personnel, based in Germany and flying home for the Christmas Holiday. 11 villagers of Lockerbie die in the crash and the total number of victims amounts to 270.
The same day, without any relation to the crash, President Reagan declares during a press conference that the US might consider a military strike against a chemical warfare factory in Libya.
4 January 1990 2 Mig aircraft of the Libyan air force are shot down by US fighter aircraft over the Mediterranean Sea.

Because of the hardening of the US stance against Libya, it would be natural to expect the US to start accusing Libya for the Lockerbie terrorist attack. No such accusations come forward.
Five months after the Lockerbie crash, 11th May 1989, the Washington Post publishes an article echoing the “near certainty” of the CIA of the identity of the terrorists, it points at the splinter group of Ahmed Jibril of the Front for the Liberation of Palestine, general command, a big name for a small hard group,. created in 1968. This small, difficult to infiltrate group is blatantly revolutionary, based in Syria and according to the CIA, backed and controlled in this case by the Iranians as revenge for the accidental shooting down of an Iranair Airbus on 3rd of July 1988 over the strait of Ormuz, making 290 victims. So far everything follows a certain logic. The US State Department follows this same line and to be sure those diplomats are not known to jump to conclusions lightly. The more so that there are still a number of American hostages in Lebanon under the control of Syria and Iran. We can be sure that the State Department has thoroughly investigated this case before following the same logic.
The 10th of August 1990, to the utter surprise of all observers, Syria, after condemning the Iraqi invasion in Kuwait, sends troops to Saudi Arabia together with the troops of the most US friendly nations Egypt and Morocco. This is definitely a victory for the US diplomacy, which continues by trying to obtain the military support of Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran, which just previously has condemned the invasion of Kuwait. choses this very moment to sign a peace treaty with Saddam Hussain, accepting the proposals of Saddam Hussain of exchanging war prisoners and retreat of the Iraqi troops of Iranian occupied territories.

The benefits are immediate: Syria immediately starts an offensive in Lebanon against the troops of Michel Aoun 13 october 1990 and invade Beyrouth.The new US friends of Hafez el Assad keep very quiet before this aggression, doubled up with the assassination of Dany Chamoun, leader of the supporters of Michel Aoun, together with the murder of his whole family.
In Washington meanwhile, the official declarations start to change: “it seems that new elements indicate that the bomb of flight 103 had been assembled and placed by Libyan agents of the Libyan secret services. In order to stay a little bit credible they add that this does not exclude the cooperation of the Syrian, Iranian and Palestinian services.
The US judicial is launched with 2 objectives in mind: accuse the Libyans and exonerate the Syrians and Iranians.
The first objective is reached by the accusation of 2 Libyan agents by the US and British judges, on 14 November 1991: Abdelbasset al Megrahi and Fahima.
The second objective is reached this same 14th November 1991 by the declaration of the chief of the criminal investigation department of the Department of Justice, confirming that no proof exist of the implication of Iran and Syria in this Lockerbie case. This same official adds that this has nothing to do with the desire of the US, to have friendly relations with Syria.
A miraculous lucky moment arrived on the 4th of November, or 10 days before, when Terry Anderson, the last US hostage has been freed, after Joseph Cicippio, Alann Steen and the British hostage Terry Waite.