The combination of bizarrely implausible factors that led to the United States-led and United Kingdom-backed invasion of Iraq in March 2003 has been exposed yet again by one of its own proponents. The Iraq-born former chemical engineer Alwan al-Janabi has told The Guardian in detail how, when approached by an official in the German security service, the BND, in March 2000, he made wildly inaccurate claims about Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Mr. Janabi kept up the inventions for six months, and even thought they would go no further when the British and German secret services rejected his claim that the son of his former boss was a procurer of WMDs; the boy was in fact at school in the U.K. The ex-chemist says he was shocked when he heard his lies being repeated in the speech by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council. In that notorious speech, Mr. Powell made it clear that the invasion would proceed, and added more fictions about Baghdad's purchases of uranium ore from Niger and its links with al-Qaida.
Mr. Janabi says he was desperate for Iraq to be rid of Saddam Hussein and therefore uttered lie after lie about the regime. His capacity for invention is similar to that of the Bush administration's Iraqi favourite Ahmed Chalabi. But by saying that given the chance he would do the same again, he puts himself in the same class for self-exculpation as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Unlike Mr. Blair, however, he has not convinced himself that what he said about Iraq was true. What they both evade is the fact that if the evidence for WMDs had been strong enough, the U.N. would have been much more likely to legitimise further action against Iraq. Secondly, Mr. Janabi brings to light wider culpability for the war than is often acknowledged. Germany shared the lies with Washington; another blot on the record is that sceptical officers in the Central Intelligence Agency, as well as the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office and security agencies, made no impression on either George W. Bush or his British counterpart. It is not just that the White House, faced with post-invasion catastrophe in Iraq, blamed the CIA for intelligence failures and then tried to wreck it from inside. Nor is it just that Mr. Blair never discussed the case for war in the Cabinet. Instead, Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair had a supporting chorus in large sections of the international media, and no British or American political institution could stop them. It remains highly unlikely that either of them will ever face justice over the 100,000 Iraqis who died for the indulgence of their fantasies.
Keywords: WMD claim, Saddam regime, Iraq invasion, Bush administration, German security service, BND, al-Qaeda, Alwan al-Janabi
The more the evidence is surfacing, the more it is getting clearer that Iraqi invasion by America was a farce -- even if Saddam was truly a tyrant, America used his dictatorship as an excuse to exploit the situation for its own benefit. Now evidence needs to be brought out comprehensively and officially regarding all the overt and covert oil deals America has made out on Iraq so that the motive behind this murderous invasion could be established beyond any doubt.
It is immaterial that a former Iraq-born chemical engineer 'made wildly inaccurate claims about Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).' It was clear from the very beginning that Bush was determined to go to war against Iraq anyway. Even after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he was more interested in going after Saddam Hussein than Osama bin Laden, the man responsible for the attacks. If Iraq was in possession of WMD, it certainly violated Security Council resolutions passed in the wake of Gulf War I which Bush Sr. fought, and abruptly ended, in 1991. That is, it violated international law. But there are procedures, established under the aegis of the United Nations, to deal with the problems of international law violations. The U.N. Charter clearly prohibits any state taking upon itself the responsibility of punishing another state for such violations, unless approved by the Security Council. If international law violations were the real problem, all that President Bush had to do was get the UN to put its machinery at work. Why was he so reluctant in the beginning even to approach the U.N.? As we all know, it took a good deal of persuading by some level-headed people in his administration, notably Secretary of State Colin Powell, for him to fulfil that legal requirement. His constant refrain, which betrayed his disdain for international laws and norms, was that it was not a requirement.
The whole world knew that President Bush and his allies were lying to their teeth, looking for an excuse to bring Saddam down. The US Congress supported his decision to go to war against Iraq. President Bush destroyed the economy of the USA and Iraq. Obama promised that he would withdraw the troops from Iraq. Nothing is done about it. Where is the rage against President Bush? Bush's crime against humanity is forgiven. Is he better than Hitler? I do not think so. Bush is worse than Hitler. War criminals in the days of Hitler were hunted and tried. Bush and the former Prime minister of UK should be tried for war crimes. Thousands of innocent lives were lost. Where is justice?
Considerably US had to eradicate Iraq by any means. Not a big surprise that they took support of lies in front of the world. Bigger fish eats the smaller one and that's what appropriate for the bigger one to maintain its threat. But people having no fixed adobe or got killed while surviving during the demolition of Iraq had no place where they could be heard. No one will ever pay for their misery.
The more serious issue is the role of UN. Is the United Nation, in reality a pragmatic and legitimate body which can over see world affairs while respecting the sovereignity of the countries. It is no mistery that UN applied rounds of economic sanctions against Iraq only because of suspicion of US regarding the WMDs of Saddam Hussain. Who will be apprehended for this, who will be prosecuted for economic crimes which UN did on common Iraqi people who were then forced into severe penury? No official condemnation from UN for illegitimate and criminal Iraq war against Iraq and no possible endeavour to bring the perpetrators of such grave crimes against such a larg chunk of people is hard to digest. UN can push rounds after rounds of sanctions against Iran which respects all its obligation to IAEA and a signatory of Non Proliferation treaty but the criminals and lunatics like these can walk free. In my views the UN charter needs a severe review. As said by Iranian president, "US Veto is an insult to the world' is true in all its essence and in fact the whole right of Vetoeing is an insult to the world. A resolution supported by 130 countries and all but US in security council cannot go further because of display of shamelessness by US. Its abominabl, pathetic and disgusting.
With all the revelations of how the foreign policies of the so-called democracies are formulated and their military deployments are organised, the least that the present administrations in the USA, UK, Spain, Australia et al can do is to hand over the architects and implementors of the illegal invasion of Iraq as well as all the relevant documents to the International Criminal Court of Justice or a special tribunal for them to be tried as war criminals on the model of Nuremberg trials.
War with Iraq for WMD was just the fantasies of two heads of the most powerful countries and nothing more.I will say now UN will have to take some stringent actions against these big ones to make them realise of their mistake.
'Might is right' Has always been......& will remain.
Justice for the weak/poor/ dead ...........well forget it!
Nuremberg trials were conducted by might. Iraqis (particularly the dead) have not got might on their sides. Bush & Blair have. They are still making big bucks on lecture(?more lies) tours.
Ideally they should both be tried for war crimes for the deaths so far & the ones that ensue on daily bases.....
ALAS!!!
May it is destiny that tyranny under one form or the other surface on the earth, to kill the human race, once in 4 decades. It was world war 1, in the early part of 20th century, then Nazi Germany under Hitler and towards the close of the 20th century, two in the form of Bush and Blair.
The Americans and the British were clamoring for democracy, justice,punishment for war crimes and war lords all over the world but they refuse to see the evil in their own backyard.
What Mr Hugo Chavez said in the UN Assembly, about George Bush turned out to be 100% true.
What does amnesty International, watch dog bodies of human rights violations,going to do in this matter? When they want the Liberian president to stand trial for war crimes, what they will do to these two gentlemen?
The Editorial has summed up the issue very well, by stating that they indulged in their fantasies.
The pack of lies was obvious to anybody with an iota of neutrality and common sense who followed the news. I was sending out mail on this to every newspaper and media channel that I could access from Japan at that time.But what chance had I and, probably, a million others like me, when Hans Blix, Dominique De Villepin the UN and France were ignored while Britain and Germany ignored themselves?
Please Email the Editor