Category Archives: Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi

Quintessentially Mandelson

mandelsonThe al-Megrahi affair continues to dominate the headlines, as it surely will for some considerable time yet. 

It has now emerged, however, that there was a conversation about the case between Gordon Brown and Col Gaddafi on the periphery of the G8 meeting in early July, when they discussed the possibility of al-Megrahi’s release and Brown urged Gaddafi to ensure that the terrorist’s homecoming, if it happened,  was a “purely private, family occasion” – a stricture conspicuously ignored by Gaddafi.

Gaddafi’s son, Saif, also says that he discussed the case with Peter Mandelson, with whom he met on at least two occasions earlier this year, most recently on Corfu, a matter of days before al-Megrahi’s release was announced.

Saif Gaddafi, indeed, has gone further and claimed on Libyan TV that there were extensive negotiations between Libya and Britain over the al-Megrahi case:

“It is to be said for the first time, you were present on the table in all commercial, oil and gas agreements that we supervised in that period,” he told Megrahi, as the pair sat together in the private jet’s luxury lounge. “You were on the table in all British interests when it came to Libya, and I personally supervised this matter.”

The potentially incendiary danger to the Government of Saif’s claim needs hardly to be pointed out.  Mandelson, however, firmly denies the allegation; he calls the suggestion of any deals between Libya and Britain “offensive” and repeats the Government’s mantra that the issue of al-Megrahi’s release was “entirely a matter for the Scottish justice minister”.    

Acknowledging the meeting with Saif Gaddafi, however, he says:

“They had the same response from me as they’ve had from any other member of the government.”

As statements go, that must be considered one of the most quintessential Mandelsonian purity. Given that we have not been told what response, if any, “they” have had from any other member of the government, all of whom are still seemingly observing a rigid vow of silence, it really doesn’t take us any further at all.  It may be true, it may not; but there’s really no way of telling.

Sometimes you really do have to take your hat off to him.

Shame is too much to expect from MacAskill

macaskillThe Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, has released the text of a letter he has sent to Kenny MacAskill, the justice minister in the Scottish Executive who took the decision to release Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi.

The letter is a devastating condemnation of MacAskill’s decision, calling it a “mockery of the rule of law”.  It is remarkably powerful, yet economical of words, in marked contrast to the 25 minutes of portentous drivel that MacAskill produced when announcing his decision to the world’s press on Thursday.

One can only imagine how MacAskill must have felt when he read the following:

You apparently made this decision without regard to the views of your partners in the investigation and prosecution of those responsible for the Lockerbie tragedy. Although the FBI and Scottish police, and prosecutors in both countries, worked exceptionally closely to hold those responsible accountable, you never once sought our opinion, preferring to keep your own counsel and hiding behind opaque references to “the need for compassion.”

You have given the family members of those who died continued grief and frustration. You have given those who sought to assure that the persons responsible would be held accountable the back of your hand. You have given Megrahi a “jubilant welcome” in Tripoli, according to the reporting. Where, I ask, is the justice?

MacAskill has had his half hour of fame.  We can but hope that, reverting to his former obscurity, he will reflect on the effect his vainglorious actions have had on so many bereaved people on both sides of the Atlantic.

It is probably too much to hope that those reflections will be attended by any real sense of shame.

Miliband and Gaddafi can’t both be telling the truth

Col Gaddafi has announced that Gordon Brown “encouraged” the Scottish Executive to take the “courageous” decision to release Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi; indeed, he has thanked him for doing so. 

If this is indeed so, it cannot also be the case that the Government regarded the decision as one for the Scottish Executive alone, as contended by David Miliband.  Put simply, either Miliband or Gaddafi is not telling the truth.

Brown must surely now at last realise just how much hot water he has landed himself in as a result of his stubborn and stupid refusal to comment on the case.

Miliband’s silence dishonours Britain

MilibandThe curious, blustering performance by David Miliband on yesterday’s Today programme – in which he referred to the return to Libya of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi as “deeply distressing” but refused to criticise, or even comment on, the decision of the Scottish Executive to release the terrorist – has served only to highlight the mess that Labour has made of devolution in Scotland.

The former Labour Scottish Office minister, Brian Wilson, delivers a savage critique of Labour’s Scottish devolutionary settlement in today’s Telegraph.  Pointing out that the al-Megrahi affair has provided the SNP with a rare and golden opportunity to grandstand on the world stage, Wilson observes:

While the Nationalists revelled in their day in the spotlight, it should also have occurred to the architects of devolution that they have a great deal to answer for when the British Government is effectively silenced over an issue that is crucial to its standing in the world and any claim to moral leadership on issues of terrorism.

It is true that much of the Scottish role in this affair derives from the legal system, which long pre-dates political devolution. In the past, however, the Scottish law officers and the Secretary of State within the Cabinet would have worked with Whitehall to achieve an agreed line behind which the whole British government would have stood. Instead, we are in the extraordinary position of not knowing what the British Government thinks because it is petrified into silence by the sanctity of the devolution settlement.

Devolution in the wrong hands was always going to be an instrument for dividing the United Kingdom rather than maintaining it. There will not be many more cases or issues with implications on the scale of the Megrahi decision. But spectacular notice has been served of what is going on in Scotland every day of the week, with the Nationalist minority administration using every lever at its disposal to promote separateness and fray the bonds of unity and common interest.

Wilson’s analysis is correct, but only up to a point.  The devolution settlement is not of such sanctity that it should preclude Mr Miliband from setting out the British Government’s position on an issue of such importance.

The fact is that the British national interest has been deeply damaged by the al-Megrahi episode.  The people of the United States, our closest ally, are rightly appalled at the early release of a mass murderer on the ostensible ground of compassion, a commodity he so self-evidently withheld from his 270 victims.  They are also bemused that this should happen without a squeak of comment, much less disapproval, from the British Government.  So, come to that, are many of the people of Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom.

Given that the promotion of the British national interest overseas is the direct responsibility of Mr Miliband, his protestation that the release of al-Megrahi is purely “a matter for the Scottish government” is manifestly wrong. 

It is also a matter of huge importance for the British Foreign Secretary and the British Prime Minister.  They should, therefore, speak out on the issue without further delay. 

And they should understand that their continuing, craven silence will do nothing but bring dishonour on our country.

Wee, sleekit beastie

Alex Salmond’s evident and ludicrous delight at having tweaked the tail of the United States and commanding, however briefly, international media attention, reminds me irresistibly of a certain 1950s Peter Sellers film:

mouse

Time for Brown to show some backbone

Paul Waugh, whose blog has become a must-read for most politicians and has deservedly rocketed from nowhere to No. 2 in the Total Politics list of top media blogs, has today posted a typically intelligent piece on the release of the Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi. 

Why, asks Waugh, is Gordon Brown maintaining such a resolute, oyster-like silence on the issue?  Justice is, of course, devolved in Scotland.  However, Waugh observes:

Isn’t this a case of treating devolution with just a bit too much reverence? Scotland is not, as far as I am aware, a foreign country. It’s still part of the United Kingdom. The White House can give its views – and spokesman Robert Gibbs has just revealed the US’s opposition was conveyed to London as well as Edinburgh - but Number 10 can’t.

Waugh is, of course, entirely right.  But there is another point.  While justice is devolved, foreign policy isn’t.  The release of the terrorist has enormous foreign policy implications, not only in relation to Libya, but also with respect to our most important international partner, the United States.

Brown therefore has a positive duty to comment on the issue. It is disgraceful that he doesn’t.   

And if it means offending the SNP administration in Edinburgh, so what?  At least he would be showing a bit of backbone; as it is, he looks supinely and pathetically weak.