What’s Worse? Looting or Invading?

Politicians take great umbrage when poor people violate property laws (as in the British riots) but the same leaders readily absolve themselves of guilt over much more serious crimes (like aggressive war in Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands). Such was the hypocrisy of British parliamentarian Jack Straw, writes Robin Beste.

 By Robin Beste

Jack Straw, former foreign secretary in Tony Blair’s government, was quick to his feet, following British Prime Minister David Cameron’s speech on the UK riots in Parliament on Aug. 11.

“We need more prisons,” Straw told Cameron and the House of Commons.

He may get his wish, looking at some of the sentences that have already been handed down in the hundreds of cases rushed through emergency courts — no doubt at the government’s bidding, to show that instant retribution will take precedence over justice.

A mother of two, who was asleep at home during the riots, has been given a five-month jail sentence for accepting running shorts stolen by someone else. A 23-year-old student got six months for stealing a £3.50 case of water from a supermarket. A 43-year-old man is in jail pending sentence for stealing items worth £1 from a newsagent.

But, if Jack Straw is right and we need more prisons, he should be one of the first inmates, alongside Tony Blair, who he served so loyally throughout the 13 years of New Labour government.

Jack Straw was foreign secretary during the run up to the Iraq war in 2002-3. He was, the Iraq Inquiry tells us, the only member of Tony Blair’s cabinet to be fully informed of the prime minister’s discussions, negotiations and plans.

Straw knew that when George Bush and Tony Blair met at Bush’s Texas ranch in April 2002, they “signed in blood” a secret deal to invade Iraq, whatever the views of the United Nations or the people of the United States and Britain.

Just prior to that meeting, Straw told Blair in a secret memo that “legally there are two potential elephant traps.” Firstly, that “regime change per se is no justification for military action.” And secondly, that “the weight of legal advice here is that a fresh mandate [from the United Nations] may well be required.”

And it was Straw who was central in the attempt to bounce the United Nations into that second resolution to give a fig-leaf of legality to a war of unjustified aggression.

He was rarely off our screens in 2002 telling us how Iraq was not giving access to the UN weapons inspectors, knowing that this simply was not true, as Hans Blix the chief UN inspector has pointed out, noting Straw’s “incorrect answers” — better known as lies — to the Iraq Inquiry.

And Straw knew it was a lie when on Feb. 11, 2003, a few days before the biggest anti-war demonstration in British history, he said: “We have to strain every sinew, even at this late stage, to avoid war.

Straw had already told Blair in his March 2002 memo that the U.S. was going to war regardless, and later he was left in no doubt by the U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell in March 2003, who told him, “We are going to war whatever Saddam does.”

The only sinew Straw was straining was to find a way to justify a war which was going to happen regardless of legality or whether most countries and most people in the world opposed it.

This is why he rejected the advice of his senior legal advisor at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Sir Michael Wood, who told him in a memo that invading Iraq “would amount to the crime of aggression” and would be illegal under international law.

Wood said it was the only time in Wood’s career, before or since, that his legal advice had not been accepted by a minister.

And this is why Straw was dismissive of Wood’s deputy FCO, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, who stated in her letter of resignation in March 2003, ” I cannot agree that it is lawful to use force against Iraq without a second [UN] Security Council resolution.”

Yet, despite all this evidence to the contrary, Jack Straw told the Iraq Inquiry that he would never “have been a party” to a war of regime change, which he said would be “improper and self-evidently unlawful.”

Straw is clearly a congenital liar whose ability to speak untruths is limitless. But he knew what would be the consequences of the war on Iraq, legal or not, because he described them in February 2003:

“People will get killed and injured. That is the brutal and inevitable reality of war. Some of those killed will be innocent civilians; even those killed who are not innocent have souls, and wives, husbands, children who will suffer.”

Straw knew he had it in his power stop this illegal war. In a written statement to the Iraq Inquiry in January 2010, he said he was “fully aware” that, as foreign secretary, his support for military action would be “critical” if the UK were to join the invasion of Iraq.

He said, “If I had refused that, the UK’s participation in the military action would not have been possible. there would almost certainly have been no majority in cabinet or in the Commons.”

This is tantamount to a confession that he colluded in mass murder. Not only would Britain have been unable to march “shoulder to shoulder” into the illegal war, but the inevitable resignation of Tony Blair and the fall of his government would have put enormous political pressure on the United States for at the least a postponement of its war plans.

The blood on Straw’s hands is no less than that of Tony Blair, for a war in which over one million Iraqis died, four million were made homeless and the country so devastated that today there is acute rationing of electricity, many areas have no access to clean water and a health service that was once the most developed in the region is in tatters.

So next time we hear David Cameron talk about “criminality pure and simple” and he tells “the lawless minority … you will pay for what you have done” we need to know if his definition of “criminality” extends beyond the crime of stealing a £3.50 case of bottled water or receiving a pair of stolen running shorts.

Does it include what the Nuremberg Tribunal, set up after World War II, following the trials of leading Nazis, called the supreme international crime:

“To initiate a war of aggression … is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

The Tribunal said individuals should be held accountable for “crimes against peace,” defined as the “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression,” which leaves little doubt about incrimination in the mass slaughter and devastation inflicted on Iraq by Jack Straw and his fellow conspirators — from Tony Blair, George Bush, and Colin Powell, to Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld.  

Jack Straw’s enthusiasm for jailing people predates his call on David Cameron to build more prisons to lock up rioters. The Blair years were marked by a doubling of the prison population to over 80,000, giving Britain the dubious accolade of locking up more of its citizens than any other European country.

When Jack Straw became home secretary, he was ever hungry for more prison places.

It tell us much about the quality of justice in the UK that the person in charge of building new prisons was someone who should have been incarcerated in one of the cells.

Robin Beste wrote this article for Stop the War Coalition. It also appeared at WarIsACrime.org

A Battle for America’s Lost History

For more than 15 years now, Consortiumnews.com has been fighting to recover what we call “lost history,” particularly the narrative of how the United States stumbled away from its noblest principles and abandoned a commitment to fact and logic.

In our view, this battle is not just some academic fascination with the details of the nation’s history. It is a struggle to regain the knowledge that could guide Americans back toward a renewed age of reason and a revitalized democracy.

Without an informed electorate, there is no hope.

So, we have focused on important chapters of this “lost history,” such as the pattern of Republican dirty politics (from Richard Nixon through the Bushes) and on decisions by leaders of both parties to rely on propaganda and mythology to sugarcoat some of Washington’s worst offenses.

Today, as the nation rushes toward another important election, we feel that it is of vital importance that the day-to-day media babble about politics be put in some meaningful historical perspective. And we are committed to do that.

But we need your help. Our mid-year fund drive has stalled well short of its minimal goal of $25,000. Please do what you can to put us over the top.

There are four easy ways to support what we do:

First option: You can make a tax-deductible donation by credit card at the Web site or by check to Consortium for Independent Journalism (CIJ); 2200 Wilson Blvd.; Suite 102-231; Arlington VA 22201. Or you can use PayPal (our account is named after our e-mail address “consortnew@aol.com”).

With any donation of $50 or more, you can request as a premium gift a copy of one of two documentaries about the historic 1980 election:

A DVD of the PBS “Frontline” documentary “The Election Held Hostage,” co-written by Consortiumnews.com’s editor Robert Parry. It explores whether Republican skullduggery with Iran was a factor in electing Ronald Reagan.

Or, filmmaker William Brandon Shanley’s documentary, “The Made for TV Election,” which examines the role of media manipulation. It is narrated by actor Martin Sheen.

For $100, you can get both. And for $125, we will add the two-DVD set of the closed-door congressional debriefing of Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe, describing his role in these historic events.

Once you make your donation, simply e-mail us your selection at consortnew@aol.com.

If you’d prefer, a book instead of a DVD, you can ask for an autographed copy of one of Robert Parry’s last three books Lost History, Secrecy & Privilege or Neck Deep as a substitute. Just follow up your donation with an e-mail expressing your choice.

Second: if you’d rather spread out your support in smaller amounts, you can sign up for a monthly donation. With contributions of $10 or more a month, you can qualify for war correspondent Don North’s DVD, “Yesterday’s Enemies” about the lives of former Salvadoran guerrillas. For details, click here.

(If you sign up for a monthly donation and want to get Don’s DVD, remember to contact us at consortnew@aol.com. If you prefer, we can substitute “The Election Held Hostage” or “The Made for TV Election.” Just ask.)

Third option: if you can’t afford a donation right now, you can also help us reach our fundraising goal by taking advantage of our deep discount for the two-book set of Robert Parry’s Secrecy & Privilege and Neck Deep (co-authored with Sam and Nat Parry). The sale price for the set is only $19, postage included. For details, click here.

Fourth: you can help us close out our warehouse space by buying full boxes of Secrecy & Privilege or Neck Deep for only $59. Each carton contains 28 paperbacks, or you can ask that we give you a mix of half and half, 14 of each.

You can give the books away as gifts or resell them for your own fundraiser. (One reader placed an order for her book club, a great idea since each book costs only about $2.)

For details about this bulk book order, click here and scroll down to the $59 offer.

As always, thanks for your support.

Robert Parry, Editor

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. He founded Consortiumnews.com in 1995 as the Internet’s first investigative magazine. He saw it as a way to combine modern technology and old-fashioned journalism to counter the increasing triviality and timidity of the mainstream U.S. news media.