Rather than simply marking the terrorist attacks with a minute’s silence and solemn pledges of defiance, what is really needed is a full public inquiry…
Rather than simply marking the terrorist attacks with a minute’s silence and solemn pledges of defiance, what is really needed is a full public inquiry into the British role in that 2011 war and what has flowed from it.
The case for holding such an inquiry is overwhelming. The principles under scrutiny – whether the government violated international law, told parliament the truth and colluded with extremist forces – are as serious as over the invasion of Iraq.
There are three main cases for the government to answer. First, British bombing in Libya, which began in March 2011, was a violation of UN Resolution 1973. This authorised member states to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya and to use “all necessary measures” to prevent attacks on civilians. What it did not authorise was the use of ground troops or regime change. Yet then prime minister David Cameron promoted both.
That these policies were illegal is confirmed by Cameron himself. He told Parliament on 21 March 2011 that the UN resolution “explicitly does not provide legal authority for action to bring about Gaddafi’s removal from power by military means”. This is, if anything, an even clearer-cut case than Iraq of a British government violating international law.
The second case to answer is over Britain’s collaboration with Islamist extremists in the war. Britain saw such forces as its boots on the ground when it was prevented from, and didn’t want to, openly deploy forces of its own.
As Middle East Eye revealed last year, the British government operated an “open door” policy that allowed Libyan exiles and British-Libyan citizens living in the UK to join the 2011 war, even though some had been subject to counterterrorism control orders. These dissidents were members of the LIFG, and most were from Manchester, like the Abedis.
The third case to answer relates to the arms embargo imposed on Libya in 2011. Resolution 1973 called on UN member states to ensure the “strict implementation” of this embargo. A Foreign Affairs Committee inquiry concluded that the international community, without mentioning Britain, turned a “blind eye” to the supply of weapons to the rebels. This was a generous way of putting it. We might ask what those “embedded” British forces were actually doing in Libya, and whether they were involved in supplying arms to opposition forces.
Moreover, a massive $400m worth of arms was provided to the rebels by Britain’s ally, Qatar, much of which went to Islamist radicals. It is inconceivable that this military support was not known to British ministers, and backed by them, as they consistently supported Qatar’s prominent role in the campaign against Gaddafi.
The Chilcot inquiry into the invasion of Iraq was launched in 2009 and reported in 2016. The key questions it addressed were:
“whether it was right and necessary to invade Iraq in March 2003 and whether the UK could – and should – have been better prepared for what followed”.
These are also key questions for the Libya war of 2011, so why has no such inquiry been launched in this case?
A key answer is that the Libya war is not regarded as so controversial or disastrous as Iraq in the mainstream media or politics. But this is wrong. Libya has also been plunged into chaos and has also seen the emergence of terrorist groups. If the 2005 7/7 bombings in London were blowback from Iraq, then the 2017 Manchester bombing was likely blowback from Libya.
The Labour opposition should commit to holding a public inquiry into the Libya war if it attains office.
*
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
