NINE years after the invasion of
Iraq by United States (U.S) and its allies, South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond
Tutu has stirred the hornet nest, arguing that United Kingdom’s (UK) former
Prime Minister Tony Blair and for President George W. Bush should be taken to
the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague over the war.
Iraq by United States (U.S) and its allies, South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond
Tutu has stirred the hornet nest, arguing that United Kingdom’s (UK) former
Prime Minister Tony Blair and for President George W. Bush should be taken to
the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague over the war.
Tutu, who raised this position in UK’s Observer newspaper on
Sunday, accused the former leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction.
Sunday, accused the former leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction.
The former archbishop said the Iraq military campaign had made the
world more unstable “than any other conflict in history”, he said.
world more unstable “than any other conflict in history”, he said.
However, Blair responded by saying “this is the same argument we
have had many times with nothing new to say”.
have had many times with nothing new to say”.
Last week, Tutu, a veteran peace campaigner who won the Nobel
Peace Prize in 1984 in recognition of his campaign against apartheid, pulled
out of a leadership summit in Johannesburg because he refused to share a
platform with Blair.
Peace Prize in 1984 in recognition of his campaign against apartheid, pulled
out of a leadership summit in Johannesburg because he refused to share a
platform with Blair.
The former Archbishop of Cape Town said the U.S.- and UK-led
action launched against Saddam’s regime in 2003 had brought about conditions
for the civil war in Syria and a possible Middle East conflict involving Iran.
action launched against Saddam’s regime in 2003 had brought about conditions
for the civil war in Syria and a possible Middle East conflict involving Iran.
“The then leaders of the United States (Bush) and Great Britain
(Blair) fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us
further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now
stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us,” he said.
(Blair) fabricated the grounds to behave like playground bullies and drive us
further apart. They have driven us to the edge of a precipice where we now
stand – with the spectre of Syria and Iran before us,” he said.
He added: “The question is not whether Saddam Hussein was good or
bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr. Bush and Mr.
Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level.”
bad or how many of his people he massacred. The point is that Mr. Bush and Mr.
Blair should not have allowed themselves to stoop to his immoral level.”
Tutu said the death toll as a result of military action in Iraq
since 2003 was grounds for Blair and Bush to be tried in The Hague.
since 2003 was grounds for Blair and Bush to be tried in The Hague.
But he said different standards appeared to be applied to Western
leaders.
leaders.
He said: “On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those
responsible should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian
peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague.”
responsible should be treading the same path as some of their African and Asian
peers who have been made to answer for their actions in The Hague.”
In response to Sunday’s article, Blair issued a strongly worded
defence of his decisions.
defence of his decisions.
He said: “To repeat the old canard that we lied about the
intelligence (on weapons of mass destruction) is completely wrong as every
single independent analysis of the evidence has shown.
intelligence (on weapons of mass destruction) is completely wrong as every
single independent analysis of the evidence has shown.
“And to say that the fact that Saddam massacred hundreds of
thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is
bizarre.”
thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is
bizarre.”
