|
WSWS
: News &
Analysis : Middle
East : Iraq
Britains dossier on Iraq: human rights as a pretext
for war
By Chris Marsden
5 December 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The latest propaganda initiative in support of a US-led war
against Iraq by Britains Labour government backfired badly
this week.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw issued a Foreign Office dossier
detailing human rights abuses perpetrated by the Iraqi regime,
explicitly linking this in his accompanying speech with the question
of arms inspections and thus the possibility of war.
Following a video presentation including images of torture
victims and children killed in gas attacks on the Kurdish town
of Halabja in 1988, Straw declared that the report was necessary
so people understand the comprehensive evil that is Saddam
Hussein.
He added, He has got these weapons of mass destruction,
chemical, biological and probably nuclear weapons which he has
used in the past against his own people as well as his neighbours
and could almost certainly use again in the future.
The human rights organisation Amnesty International was highly
critical as to the timing of the dossiers publication. Spokesman
Richard Bunting said, We are afraid this is opportunistic
and selective.... The British and US are being selective, conveniently
ignoring other countries and using that record to drive forward
foreign and military goals.
Hania Mufti of the US-based Human Rights Watch said, The
timing would not be so much of an issue if it came against a background
of previous actions by the Government to expose human rights violations.
The group said that when it collected evidence of Saddam Husseins
abuses at Halabja and elsewhere in the Kurdish area of Iraq, the
Foreign Office ignored it.
Labour MP Tam Dalyell, who is Father of the House of Commons
as the longest serving parliamentarian, said, I think that
this highly unusual, indeed, unprecedented publication is cranking
up for war.
Labour MP Alice Mahon asked, Why is this being published
now? We know all of this is part of a softening-up exercise.
Significant sections of the British media were critical of
the governments move.
The Daily Mirror published an article by campaigning
journalist John Pilger that pointed out, When Blair and
Bush incessantly refer to Saddam using chemical weapons
against his own people, specifically the Kurdish village
of Halabja in 1988, they never explain that Britain and America
were accomplices.
Not only did both governments secretly and illegally
approve the sale of chemical weapons agents, officials in
Washington and Whitehall tried to cover up the Halabja atrocity,
with the Americans even faking a story that Iran was responsible.
Even the state-owned BBCs diplomatic correspondent James
Robbins was moved to explain that the dossier was a political
document intended to achieve a particular political effect.
Straws efforts were received no better in Europe, which
Britain hopes will back Americas war aims. In Germany, for
example, the Berliner Zeitung called the dossier part
of its [Britains] propaganda war for the disarming and possible
overthrow of the Iraqi dictator.
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung commented, It is
apparent that the report is aimed at the British public, whose
support is seen as necessary by the Blair government in the event
of a military intervention alongside the United States.
The Frankfurter Rundschau said the report leaves
behind a bitter aftertaste.
The government was immediately placed on a back foot. Britains
spokesman on Iraq, Mark Sedwill, issued a pathetic denial that
the report was intended to build a case for military action against
Iraq. Speaking in the Jordanian capital Amman just prior to its
release, he said, There is a strong impression around in
the Middle East that Britain has a desire to prepare for military
action on Iraq. It isnt so. We want a peaceful way out of
this.
A Foreign Office official at the press launch of the dossier
said it was not the job of the present government to have to justify
the Conservative governments of the 1980s.
The Foreign Office later had to retract Straws assertion
that in all likelihood Iraq possesses nuclear weapons, which is
contradicted by all US and British intelligence reports. It claimed
that he had been referring to Saddam Husseins intention
to acquire such weapons.
The dossier has been issued because of the concerns of the
Blair government that the United Nations arms inspections will
not produce evidence that makes the case for a renewed military
bombardment of Iraq. Since the UN inspectors arrived in Iraq on
November 28, they have been given unrestricted access to the sites
they wished to view, including Husseins palaces, and have
found nothing. Baghdad has also promised to issue its list of
any weapons programmes it is undertaking on December 7, one day
before it was required to do so, and has said that this would
prove that the country has no weapons of mass destruction.
However, the US has indicated that it will essentially ignore
the UNs findings and instead compare Iraqs report
with its own undisclosed intelligence to justify military action.
Speaking on the day Straw issued his dossier, President Bush expressed
deep scepticism about the ability of the UN inspectors to uncover
weapons of mass destruction. He insisted, A regime that
fires upon American and British pilots is not taking the path
of compliance. A regime that sends letters filled with protests
and falsehoods is not taking the path of compliance.
He said that it was up to Iraq, not the inspectors, to disclose
its weapons programmes, or it would face a serious response.
Bush cited two alleged examples of Iraqi anti-aircraft fire
as supposed proof of a lack of compliance. In reality, the US
and Britain have massively stepped up their ongoing bombardment
of Iraq in an effort to provoke such retaliatory action. According
to reports, ordinance dropped on Southern Iraq has increased by
300 percent since March to nearly 54 tonnes in September.
The US welcomed Britains dossier as a valuable addition
to its own propaganda offensive. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
told the media, Disarmament is only one of the steps required
of Iraq in Resolution 1441.... [It] also calls for Iraq to end
repression of its civilian population.
In a veiled attack on European countries opposed to war, he
added, That this pattern of human rights violations seems
not of concern to some nations is disturbing.... A regime with
weapons of mass destruction and such contempt for human life,
even the lives of its own people, ought to be considered what
it is: namely, a particular kind of danger.
As if to reinforce the widespread accusation of political opportunism,
Straws next move following the issuing of his dossier was
to visit the Turkish capital of Ankara. His mission was to help
bring Turkey on board the US-British war effort in return for
assurances of British support for Turkeys membership of
the European Union.
Turkeys appalling human rights record was not a subject
for discussion despite the fact that, according to a few brief
extracts from Amnestys annual report, the following conditions
exist in the country: Torture in police custody remained
widespread and was practised systematically.... Dozens of political
killings were reported, some of which may have been extrajudicial
executions.... Repression of political parties and organisations
in the mainly Kurdish southeast continued.... There were numerous
reports of torture and ill-treatment of men, women and children....
The most frequently reported methods included severe beatings,
blindfolding, suspension by the arms or wrists, electric shocks,
sexual abuse, and food and sleep deprivation.
Straw was followed to Turkey by Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy
Defense Secretary in the Bush administration, who secured Ankaras
agreement that US troops would be allowed to use its air space
and facilities. The number being considered is 100,000. In return,
Wolfowitz promised Turkey economic support to tide it through
any instability that might ensue from military confrontation on
its doorstep and that the Kurds in northern Iraq would not be
allowed to set up their own state.
See Also:
Inventing a pretext for war against
Iraq
Friedman of the Times executes an assignment for the Pentagon
[3 December 2002]
Bush advisor tells British
MPs: war against Iraq regardless of UN findings
[26 November 2002]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |