The West's 'Profound
Hypocrisy' Over Lockerbie 'Suspect's' Release
"Western governments are well aware of the nature of the Libyan regime. They knew it would make intense media use of the return of someone who, by assuming a sentence he considers unjust, permitted Libya to escape the global banishment to which it was confined."
A huge crowd welcomes Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bombing convict, who was freed from a Scottish prison on 'compassionate grounds.' Standing beside him is the son of Libyan despot Mouammar Qadaffi, Seif al-Islam Qadaffi. The release highlights some key differences between European and American justice.
The release of Abdels Basset Ali
Mohamed al-Megrahi and the triumphant welcome predictably prepared by Libyan
authorities have provoked reactions of incredible hypocrisy from Western
countries. Al-Megrahi was found guilty by a Scottish court on the basis of a dossier
fabricated mostly by Western intelligence services. No one is yet in a position
to assert that justice was done. The suspect, who apparently has about three
months to live, claims that it wasn't. What should have been an epilog that was
unsatisfying to all concerned, has given rise in the West to a variety of
expressions of bad faith.
Tripoli should have been
discreet and avoided publicity surrounding the return of this man from Libya's
special services. But we say this in retrospect to cope with the acid
commentaries of the [Western] press. Western governments are well aware of the nature
of the Libyan regime. They knew it would make intense media use of the return
of someone who, by assuming a sentence he considers unjust, permitted Libya to escape
the state of international banishment to which it was confined. Tripoli, let’s
not forget, gave in on practically everything: it signed its surrender and
delivered secrets that put the father of the Pakistani bomb in serious
difficulty. Therefore, no one could have expected that it wouldn't seek
compensation for its compromises by welcoming al-Megrahi home as a hero and portraying
his return as a "victory." This is all in the order of things and
arguably, this is all part of the transaction. "Business as usual."
That this transaction doesn’t
suit the Western press and families of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing is quite
understandable. Much less understandable are the false expressions of outrage
from Western officials. As if Colonel Qaddafi had played a dirty trick by
exuberantly hosting Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. "Profoundly troubling,
profoundly appalling," lamented British Foreign Minister David Miliband; "shocking
and disgusting," adds the White House, seeking to outbid Britain.
One is tempted to paraphrase
Mr. Miliband: all of this is profoundly hypocritical and profoundly "insincere."
Doesn't anyone in Europe know how Colonel Qaddafi uses the media and manages
its impact? The colonel, who is aggressively courted by merchants of every
kind, has paid visits to several European capitals and demonstrated that he knows
how to deal with the media as well as with a Blair or a Sarkozy. These British
officials, who settled the al-Megrahi case in exchange for very juicy
contracts, didn't expect Libya, which has never admitted the guilt of its man,
to welcome him with shame as the guilty party?
Considering that the Libyan
system leans strongly on its security services, it could hardly miss the
opportunity to pay tribute to an agent who agreed to have his country extradite
him to the Scottish courts. There is nothing illogical in Libya’s attitude.
It is completely coherent.
"In all of its
commercial contracts for oil and gas with Great Britain, Mr. Megrahi was always
on the negotiating table." So declared Seif al-Islam, son of Colonel
Qadaffi, and there is no reason to disbelieve him. Tripoli has fully complied
with its agreements. It is Western officials, embarrassed by the comments of
their own press, who are indulging in an appalling duplicity.
