Truth be told, the idea of a oil for freedom deal was considered in negotiations for the giant BP contract with Libya. Years ago, Britain and Libya were negotiating a prisoner exchange deal, whereby a citizen of one country serving time in prison in the other country can be considered for transfer to his home country to serve out the remaining prison term there. The sticky point in that negotiation was convicted Lockerbie bomber Libyan Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi who was serving time in Scotland for the 1998 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 that killed 259 passengers and crew onboard that flight and 11 on the ground.
Libya pressed Britain to include Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi in the prisoner release deal as quid pro quo for trade deals. Scotland didn’t want that, and London then told Libya that the deal would have to exclude Megrahi. Saif al-Islam Gadhafi, second-eldest son of Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi who was in on the negotiations said that Britain’s stand angered Libya.
Now British Justice Secretary Jack Straw is quoted in The Daily Telegraph as saying: ”Yes, (it was) a very big part of that. I’m unapologetic about that. … Libya was a rogue state. We wanted to bring it back into the fold. And yes, that included trade because trade is an essential part of it and subsequently there was the BP deal.”
Was Jack Straw misquoted? Not according his unnamed adviser who said: ”Jack’s position has been on the record for some days. He has never denied that seeking an agreement with Libya over a prisoner transfer agreement was connected to a wider process of normalizing relations with Libya, including on trade, which is in the interests of us all.”
As it turned out, Britain said no to including al Megrahi in the prison release deal. According to Saif al-Islam Gadhafi: “And then we said no. We were very very angry. It’s not acceptable.” Then over Scotland’s objection, Britain gave in and the agreement was signed. Within days, Libya approved the huge BP oil exploration contract.
But Abdelbeset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi was released not under the prisoner release agreement. He was released on compassionate ground as he was medically certified to be suffering from terminal cancer of the prostate. So Britain could in fact deny that his release was part of a oil for freedom deal. On this, Saif al-Islam Gadhafi agreed: “The decision was based on compassionate grounds, not because of business deals. It was obvious. The guy is sick, seriously sick. He has cancer and because of that they made the decision and I think it was the right decision.” He added that relations between Libya and Britain would have been strained if al Megrahi were to die in a British jail.
Think about it. Can governments claiming to act in the wider interest of their countries overlook the atrocities of convicted mass murderers and release them to secure lucrative trade deals? Did Britain make a mistake? What about Scotland? And Libya?
Earlier posts:
Lockerbie Bomber – Web Of Entanglement
Lockerbie Bomber – Oil For Freedom Deal?
Hero’s Welcome For A Mass Murderer
Recent Comments