London Bombs: Blair’s Responsibility
By Fauzia Qureshi

TODAY terrorism is the most serious threat to the security of the world. Just when the West hoped that they may no longer have to defend their territories against any foreign invasion, the virus of terrorism has struck.

A lot has been written about the recent London bombings but there are numerous questions which still remain unanswered. Who is responsible and where are the roots of terrorism?

Is the cause of terrorism a religious or political factor? Is it time for the West to ask themselves ‘Are they being attacked for what they are or what they do?’

There is no denying the fact that Tony Blair has brought home his master’s (Bush) illegal, blood-soaked and unprovoked misadventure in the Middle East.

The Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham House, Britain’s most authoritative think-tank, has linked the recent London bombings unequivocally to the Iraq invasion. The authors of the report, Paul Wilkinson, a terrorist expert of St Andrews University and Frank Gregory, of the University of Southampton have stated that Blair stood ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with the United States ‘not in the sense of being an equal decision-maker, but rather as pillion passenger compelled to leave the steering to the ally in the driving seat.’

The cost of which has been in terms of British lives, military expenditure and not to mention the current bombings.

The irony is that Mr Blair can’t even deny that he was not warned beforehand about consequences of siding with the US in an ‘illegitimate’ war.

Blair was warned by the Joint Intelligence Committee that by far the greatest terrorist threat to this country would be ‘heightened’ by military action against Iraq. Did Mr Blair listen? No. About 79% of Londoners who, according to a YouGov survey in February 2003, believed that a British attack on Iraq would make an attack on London more likely. Even Saudi officials claim to have alerted Britain about the terror attacks. What did Tony Blair expect?

It is a fact that UK contributed proportionately more to the invasion of Iraq than did the US( a third of the total military force compared to a tenth of the Pentagon’s). Even in the post-war Iraq, UK continues to deploy the second-largest force there after the US.

Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, argued long back while appealing to Tony Blair not to support the war in Iraq by saying, “ An assault on Iraq will inflame world opinion and jeopardize security and peace everywhere. London, as one of the major world cities, has a great deal to lose from war and a lot to gain from peace, international cooperation and global stability.” After the bombings, Mr Ken remarked, “ I don’t just denounce the suicide bombers.

I denounce those governments that use indiscriminate slaughter to advance their foreign policy”- which presumably means Israel and the US along with UK. “The bombings would never have happened if the West had simply left the Arab nations alone in the wake of the First World War, rather than trying to control the flow of oil.”

What is interesting to note is that there are still unanswered questions regarding the recent London bombings. Like, why would the so-called Islamist extremists choose to bomb areas of London which are densely populated with Muslims? Why would they strike just as the UK public opinion was turning against the coalition’s ongoing rampage in Iraq?

If these suicide bombers were Al-Qaeda members who are supposed to be highly well-organised, then why did they leave their ID’s and other documents behind?

On what basis did the Associated Press, Sky News and the Israeli paper Arutz Sheva report that the Israeli Embassy had received early warnings of the attacks(does it ring a bell in case of 9/11?) causing the Israeli Finance Minister(now former) Mr Netanyahu to cancel plans for a speaking engagement at a London hotel?

Why is Mr Blair rejecting calls of Conservative leader Michael Howard for an investigation? Not to mention that Downing Street is trying hard to quash the publication of three separate, recently written, memoirs whose revelations, if published, will prove extremely embarrassing to the government. The first is that by Sir Jeremy Greenstock, former envoy to Iraq, who has described America’s decision to invade Iraq as ‘politically illegitimate’ in his book, “The Costs of War.” Then there is Sir Christopher Meyer, former Ambassador to Washington, whose book is to be published in October, this year. The third is the diary of Lance Price, Blair’s ex-spin doctors, whose memoir is already banned for its ‘unacceptability.’ Why are the champions of freedom of speech quashing these publications?

How can one not realize that so many lies, in the name of democracy and Western values have been spoken by the Bush/Blair gang. There is no doubt that West holds double standard. Washington calls for democracy in the Middle East, but drops hundreds of prisoners down a legal black hole in Guantanamo. The Muslim world perceives the Western policy as a policy of aggression. The British must realize that by promoting the American-invented tag of ‘Islamic terrorism’ they are giving terror a legitimacy it couldn’t have earned on its own. No one blames Hinduism for the bombings committed by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka or Catholism for the bombings committed by the IRA. Then how is Islam to be blamed? Does Mr Blair by putting the onus on Muslims to defeat terror absolve himself of responsibility?

Can Mr Blair explain the deaths of innocent people in Afghanistan( the number increasing on daily basis)? Does Mr Blair take responsibility for the deaths of innocent Palestinian babies at Israeli checkpoints, whose mothers have been forced to give birth beside the road with lights of a hospital in the distance? How many old men and women have been humiliated and tortured at the hands of Israeli butchers? How many innocent families have been blown to pieces by American supplied F-16s with British-supplied parts? Can Mr Blair explain the deaths of more than half a million Iraqi infants whose deaths UNICEF attributed to the embargo imposed on Iraq after the first Gulf war? Why is the West not concerned with these ‘genocidal’ acts? Is it because the dying are all Muslims?

Terrorism is not a new phenomenon. Terrorism has only grown in sophistication. The cause of current terrorism is neither religion nor hatred for the ‘Western way of life.’ The principal cause is the Western violence being inflicted on the people of the Muslim world. It is rather political, requiring a political solution. It is deeply embedded in injustice, lies and double standards. It is not Islam which is the problem, but rather the genuine grievances and injustices left unresolved-particularly in Palestine, Kashmir, now Iraq and Afghanistan. As long as the Western militaries are bombing innocent civilians, torturing and imprisoning other people’s countries, reaction from the oppressed will remain, which is pronounced as ‘terrorism’ by the oppressor.

If Mr Blair is sincere with his people he must accept responsibility for what is done by him. Telling lies on the behest of Mr Bush in order to influence public opinion has only ruined Mr Blair’s credibility. He must first ask himself, ‘ what role is he playing in this so proclaimed “war on terror?” Is his role a just one? Does he want to continue this war? If not, how and what will stop it? Will the resolution of Israel-Palestinian conflict in the form of Israels total destruction bring an end to the root cause of injustice, violence and terrorism throughout the world?●

© 2005 Fauzia Qureshi