7/7
- WHY? IRAQ
The Evidence
For A Link
JNV Anti-War Briefing 84
1 August 2005 |
A
shortened version of this briefing is available as a pdf
here
Posted: 31 July
2005 |
1) Most British people (64-85 per cent)
think there is a link.
2) Chatham House foreign policy experts think there is a link.
3) The Home Office and Foreign Office think there is a link.
4) Much of British intelligence thinks there is a link.
5) Many Conservatives think there is a link.
6) The terrorists themselves say there is a link.
7) Al Qaeda is motivated by US/UK foreign policy, according
to the CIA's bin Laden expert.
BLAIR CHANGES HIS LINE
After weeks of denying that there was any link between the ongoing
war in Iraq and the London bombings, Prime Minister Tony
Blair was forced on 26 July to admit that the occupation
of Iraq is used by al Qaeda to recruit new bombers.
UK MAJORITY BELIEVES IN LINK
The Guardian reported
on 19 July, '33% of Britons think the prime minister bears "a
lot" of responsibility for the London bombings and a further
31% "a little".' That's two-thirds of the British
people. 'Only 28% of voters agree with the government that Iraq
and the London bombings are not connected.'
On 25 July, the Daily Mirror
reported, '23 per cent said
the war was the main reason for the London bombings.
Another 62 per cent believe
that while Iraq was not
the principle cause, it did
contribute to the reasons behind the atrocities. Just
12 per cent said there was no real link.'
THE HARD LEFT
The Guardian editors
(and many other commentators) have condemned 'the obsession
in some quarters with trying to establish that the bombings
can be explained by hostility to Mr Blair following the invasion
of Iraq.' This they refer to as 'the hard left's obsession with
Iraq'. (28 July)
They do not mention that this 'hard left' includes the Royal
Institute for International Affairs, the Home Office and Foreign
Office, much of British intelligence (MI5, the Joint Terrorism
Analysis Centre, and the Joint Intelligence Committee), and
Conservatives.
CHATHAM HOUSE REPORT
One reason Mr Blair had to change tack was the report on terrorism
by the respected Royal Institute for International Affairs (Chatham
House) released on 18 July. This said that, 'The
UK is at particular risk [from al Qaeda] because it is
the closest ally of the United
States, [and] has deployed
armed forces in the military campaigns to topple the
Taleban regime in Afghanistan
and in Iraq... Riding
pillion with a powerful
ally has proved costly in terms of British and US military lives,
Iraqi lives, military expenditure, and the damage caused to
the counter-terrorism campaign.'
THE EXTREMISM REPORT
The burning question in British politics is how young Muslims
who have grown up here become so full of hate that they could
carry out the 7/7 atrocities. The primary answer given in the
secret 'Young Muslims and Extremism'
report, compiled by the Home Office and the Foreign Office last
year, is: British foreign policy.
The report says: 'It seems that a particularly strong cause
of disillusionment amongst Muslims including young Muslims is
a perceived "double standard" in the
foreign policy of western governments (and often those
of Muslim governments), in particular
Britain and the US...'
'This perception seems to have become more acute post 9/11.
The perception is that passive
"oppression", as demonstrated in British foreign
policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way
to "active oppression"
- the war on terror, and in Iraq
and Afghanistan
are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been
acts against Islam.'
The causes of 'extremism' are given in this order: foreign policy,
Islamophobia, counter-terror laws, and so on.
BRITISH INTELLIGENCE SEES THE LINK
Before the war, the Joint Intelligence Committee warned Tony
Blair on 10 February 2003 that, 'al-Qaida and associated groups
continued to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat
to Western interests, and that threat would be heightened by
military action against Iraq.' (ISC
report, p. 34)
Weeks before the 7/7 bombings, the Joint
Terrorist Analysis Centre warned that, 'Events
in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation
and a focus of a range
of terrorist related activity in the UK'.
After the 21/7 bombing attempt, internal spy agency MI5
warned, 'Though they have a range of aspirations and "causes",
Iraq is a dominant issue
for a range of [al Qaeda-type] extremist groups and individuals
in the UK and Europe.'
CONSERVATIVES SEE THE LINK
It's not just George Galloway or Labour left-wingers who see
a link with Iraq. Before the war on Iraq, in February 2003,
Ken Clarke, former Conservative
Chancellor, asked, 'Next time
a large bomb goes off in a western city, how far did this policy
[the invasion of Iraq] contribute to it?'
Former Conservative MP Matthew
Parris has recorded that in the aftermath of the London
bombings, in his right-wing social circles, 'Alongside rampantly
right-wing views on race, culture and immigration, you encounter
- and among deeply conservative folk - a
knee-jerk sympathy for the views of George Galloway.
You will be very far from being thrown out of a Derbyshire pub
for suggesting that "Tony
Blair asked for this".'
THE TERRORISTS THEMSELVES
'In a remarkable insight into the motives behind the alleged
would-be bombers, Hussain Osman, arrested in Rome on Friday,
has revealed how the suspects watched hours of TV footage showing
grief-stricken Iraqi widows and children alongside images of
civilians killed in the conflict. He is alleged to have told
prosecutors that after watching the footage: "There was
a feeling of hatred and a conviction that it was necessary to
give a signal—to do something." ' (Observer,
31 July)
The Leeds bombers are said to have formed their cell after watching
'videos of what was happening
in Bosnia, Iraq and Chechnya...You see that and you start
to get angry. That was the beginning.' (Sunday
Telegraph, 17 July)
The first, and most plausible, claim
of responsibility for the 7/7 bombings describes the attacks
as 'revenge against the British Zionist Crusader government
in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq
and Afghanistan.'
THE CIA'S BIN LADEN EXPERT
Back in January 2005, Michael
Scheuer, the CIA's bin Laden expert from 1996 to 1999, said
we must understand that 'the motivation for the people fighting
us has to do with our policies...
we're not going to talk these
people out of what they're up to... it's
a mistake to think the Muslims don't understand our policy...
it would make a difference if there was some kind of change
in our policy toward Israel... we need a
shot of democracy inside the United States... If... the
decision is to keep those policies kind of as they are - well,
I think that might be a mistake. But... at least the country
would be going into the war against Islamic militancy with its
eyes open, knowing that those
policies, more than anything else, motivate our enemy.
We would go into it with our eyes open. We'd
be expecting a very long war, and a very bloody and costly war.'
[The following
paragraphs do not appear in the pdf of the briefing, for reasons
of space.]
WITHDRAW
Tony Blair refuses to accept that invading and occupying Iraq
has increased the risk to Britain. See, for example, this wonderful
example of evasion from his 26 July press conference:
Question:
I am going to return to Iraq, I am afraid, simply as a fact,
rightly or wrongly, do you accept the possibility that Britain's
involvement in Iraq has increased the danger of terrorism in
this country?
Prime Minister:
I don't think I am going to answer that in different terms than
I have already answered I am afraid, which is to say that these
people will use it. But I honestly think this, and it is up
to you whether you agree with it or not, that the roots of this
go a lot deeper. You come back to 11 September and 11 September
happened before Iraq or Afghanistan.
Question:
Would you accept the possibility?
Prime Minister:
I know what you are trying to do. [End of answer] <http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page7999.asp>
Invading and occupying Iraq has increased the risk from terrorism.
Withdrawing from Iraq would decrease the risk from terrorism.
It's not rocket science.
We should withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan because it's the
right thing to do. (As for the objection that this would
lead to civil war, and even greater disaster for the Iraqi people,
there is the UN Option.)
Withdrawal would also make Britain
safer from terrorism.
