The Battles

NOTE:  this is #2 in a series: 

1. 2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu
2. 2012-09-10 Letter to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu also calling for arrest of Bush & Blair et al
3. 2012-09-18 Reply from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu and arrest of Bush

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

September 10, 2012

TO:   The International Criminal Court

The Honourable Luis Moreno-Ocampo

otp.informationdesk   AT   icc-cpi.int

Office of the Prosecutor

The Hague

FROM:   Sandra Finley

sabest1  AT   sasktel.net

Saskatoon, SK Canada

306 373 8078

Dear Luis Moreno-Ocampo;

Archbishop Desmond Tutu recently boycotted a seminar in Johannesburg at which Tony Blair was a speaker.

I am thereby prompted to contact the ICC a second time (the first time was in 2009).

1.     Has a decision been taken by the ICC to prosecute George Bush, Tony Blair, Dick Cheney and others for war crimes under Article 15 of the Rome Statute?  Can you please tell me if not, why not?

2.     Did you receive my communication to the ICC with documentation of the laws and the evidence against Bush and Company (copy at 2009-03-08)?   I requested that you issue a warrant for the arrest of Bush.  There needs to be Equal Treatment with the ICC prosecution of Sudanese President Al-Bashir, for example.  As far as I know, I did not receive a reply, no explanation from the ICC.  I sympathize – – I think you are badly under-funded, but would it be possible for you to reply now?

3.   On January 19, 2010, Law Professor Francis Boyle from the University of Illinois filed a request with the ICC for the arrest of Bush and his companions.  See http://www.redress.cc/global/redress20100206.  Will you please send me a copy of the reply the ICC sent to Professor Boyle?

4.     2011-2012:  “ In Kuala Lumpur, after two years of investigation by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC), a tribunal (the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, or KLWCT) consisting of five judges with judicial and academic backgrounds reached a unanimous verdict that found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide as a result of their roles in the Iraq War. . . . “

Has the ICC been in contact with the KLWCC?  It seems to me that  they have amassed an extremely valuable body of information and legal opinions that the ICC could use to expedite work on the file of Bush-Blair-Cheney-and-others?

Democracy is dependent upon an informed citizenry.  Mainstream media did not tell citizens that Tutu’s action is but one in a lengthy international effort to bring Bush and company to justice.  It is left to bloggers to inform their friends.  There is a listing of efforts by famous and not-famous people, as well as the Law and the Evidence at:  Arrest George Bush. Rule of Law essential to democracy.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu strongly stated (yet again) the need for George Bush and his companions to be brought to trial by the International Criminal Court. (Tutu:  “I couldn’t sit with someone who justified the invasion of Iraq with a lie”,  see  2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu)

Tutu’s question,

• “On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers’ circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush’s chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?”

is reiterated in the press,  The Guardian, U.K.:

• But it is Tutu’s call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague that is most startling. Claiming that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones, he says the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and Bush to be tried at the ICC.

“On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life 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,” he says.

Thank-you very much for your consideration of my questions.

Best wishes to you, in your work that is extremely important for justice, peace, humanity and the environment,

Sandra Finley

NOTE:  this is #1 in a series: 

1. 2012-09-02 Bush, Blair should face trial for role in Iraq war, says Desmond Tutu
2. 2012-09-10 Letter to the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu also calling for arrest of Bush & Blair et al
3. 2012-09-18 Reply from the International Criminal Court (ICC), Tutu and arrest of Bush

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

New and influential allies add their voice to the call for justice.

Note the news coverage:   NO MENTION of CONTEXT, the fact that Tutu is one in a long stream of prominent (and not prominent!) people who are weighing in on the efforts to bring Bush, Blair, Cheney and others to trial.  Tutu’s action is reported as a one-of event.

A file of on-going efforts that will eventually bring these people before the International Criminal Court (ICC) is at:    Arrest George Bush.  Rule of Law essential to democracy.

CONTENTS (BELOW)

1. DESMOND TUTU’S ARTICLE IN THE OBSERVER, Why I had no choice but to spurn Tony Blair
2. THE GUARDIAN (U.K.) REPORT ON TUTU’S STATEMENT
3. THE GLOBE & MAIL REPORTS TUTU’S STATEMENT

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

1.  DESMOND TUTU’S ARTICLE IN THE OBSERVER, Why I had no choice but to spurn Tony Blair

I couldn’t sit with someone who justified the invasion of Iraq with a lie

The Observer,  Sunday 2 September 2012

The immorality of the United States and Great Britain’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003, premised on the lie that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, has destabilised and polarised the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history.

Instead of recognising that the world we lived in, with increasingly sophisticated communications, transportations and weapons systems necessitated sophisticated leadership that would bring the global family together, the then-leaders of the US and UK 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.

If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth? Days before George W Bush and Tony Blair ordered the invasion of Iraq, I called the White House and spoke to Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser, to urge that United Nations weapons inspectors be given more time to confirm or deny the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Should they be able to confirm finding such weapons, I argued, dismantling the threat would have the support of virtually the entire world. Ms Rice demurred, saying there was too much risk and the president would not postpone any longer.

On what grounds do we decide that Robert Mugabe should go the International Criminal Court, Tony Blair should join the international speakers’ circuit, bin Laden should be assassinated, but Iraq should be invaded, not because it possesses weapons of mass destruction, as Mr Bush’s chief supporter, Mr Blair, confessed last week, but in order to get rid of Saddam Hussein?

The cost of the decision to rid Iraq of its by-all-accounts despotic and murderous leader has been staggering, beginning in Iraq itself. Last year, an average of 6.5 people died there each day in suicide attacks and vehicle bombs, according to the Iraqi Body Count project. More than 110,000 Iraqis have died in the conflict since 2003 and millions have been displaced. By the end of last year, nearly 4,500 American soldiers had been killed and more than 32,000 wounded.

On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life 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.

But even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased? To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?

Leadership and morality are indivisible. Good leaders are the custodians of morality. 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.

If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?

My appeal to Mr Blair is not to talk about leadership, but to demonstrate it. You are a member of our family, God’s family. You are made for goodness, for honesty, for morality, for love; so are our brothers and sisters in Iraq, in the US, in Syria, in Israel and Iran.

I did not deem it appropriate to have this discussion at the Discovery Invest Leadership Summit in Johannesburg last week. As the date drew nearer, I felt an increasingly profound sense of discomfort about attending a summit on “leadership” with Mr Blair. I extend my humblest and sincerest apologies to Discovery, the summit organisers, the speakers and delegates for the lateness of my decision not to attend.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

2.  THE GUARDIAN (U.K.) REPORT ON TUTU’S STATEMENT

Anti-apartheid hero attacks former prime minister over ‘double standards on war crimes’

Toby Helm, political editor

Tony Blair has strongly contested Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s views.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has called for Tony Blair and George Bush to be hauled before the international criminal court in The Hague and delivered a damning critique of the physical and moral devastation caused by the Iraq war.

Tutu, a Nobel peace prize winner and hero of the anti-apartheid movement, accuses the former British and US leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction and says the invasion left the world more destabilised and divided “than any other conflict in history”.

Writing in the Observer, Tutu also suggests the controversial US and UK-led action to oust Saddam Hussein in 2003 created the backdrop for the civil war in Syria and a possible wider Middle East conflict involving Iran.

“The then leaders of the United States and Great Britain,” Tutu argues, “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.”

But it is Tutu’s call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague that is most startling. Claiming that different standards appear to be set for prosecuting African leaders and western ones, he says the death toll during and after the Iraq conflict is sufficient on its own for Blair and Bush to be tried at the ICC.

“On these grounds, alone, in a consistent world, those responsible for this suffering and loss of life 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,” he says.

The court hears cases on genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. To date, 16 cases have been brought before the court but only one, that of Thomas Lubanga, a rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), has been completed. He was sentenced earlier this year to 14 years’ imprisonment for his part in war crimes in his home country.

Tutu’s broadside is evidence of the shadow still cast by Iraq over Blair’s post-prime ministerial career, as he attempts to rehabilitate himself in British public life. A longtime critic of the Iraq war, the archbishop pulled out of a South African conference on leadership last week because Blair, who was paid 2m rand (£150,000) for his time, was attending. It is understood that Tutu had agreed to speak without a fee.

In his article, the archbishop argues that as well as the death toll, there has been a heavy moral cost to civilisation, with no gain. “Even greater costs have been exacted beyond the killing fields, in the hardened hearts and minds of members of the human family across the world.

“Has the potential for terrorist attacks decreased?  To what extent have we succeeded in bringing the so-called Muslim and Judeo-Christian worlds closer together, in sowing the seeds of understanding and hope?” Blair and Bush, he says, set an appalling example. “If leaders may lie, then who should tell the truth?” he asks.

“If it is acceptable for leaders to take drastic action on the basis of a lie, without an acknowledgement or an apology when they are found out, what should we teach our children?”

In a statement, Blair strongly contested Tutu’s views and said Iraq was now a more prosperous country than it had been under Saddam Hussein. “I have a great respect for Archbishop Tutu’s fight against apartheid – where we were on the same side of the argument – but to repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence 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. We have just had the memorials both of the Halabja massacre, where thousands of people were murdered in one day by Saddam’s use of chemical weapons, and that of the Iran-Iraq war where casualties numbered up to a million including many killed by chemical weapons.

“In addition, his slaughter of his political opponents, the treatment of the Marsh Arabs and the systematic torture of his people make the case for removing him morally strong. But the basis of action was as stated at the time.

“In short, this is the same argument we have had many times with nothing new to say. But surely in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.

“I would also point out that despite the problems, Iraq today has an economy three times or more in size, with the child mortality rate cut by a third of what it was. And with investment hugely increased in places like Basra.”

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

3.  THE GLOBE & MAIL REPORTS TUTU’S STATEMENT

by David Stringer

LONDON — The Associated Press

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu called Sunday for Tony Blair and George Bush to face prosecution at the International Criminal Court for their role in the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq

Archbishop Tutu, the retired Anglican Church’s archbishop of South Africa, wrote in an op-ed piece for The Observer newspaper that the ex-leaders of Britain and the United States should be made to “answer for their actions.”

The Iraq war “has destabilized and polarized the world to a greater extent than any other conflict in history,” wrote Archbishop Tutu, who was awarded the Nobel prize in 1984.

“Those responsible for this suffering and loss of life 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,” he added.

The Hague, Netherlands, based court is the world’s first permanent war crimes tribunal and has been in operation for 10 years. So far it has launched prosecutions only in Africa, including in Sudan, Congo, Libya and Ivory Coast.

Archbishop Tutu has long been a staunch critic of the Iraq war, while others opposed to the conflict — including playwright Harold Pinter — have previously called for Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair to face prosecution at the Hague.

“The then-leaders of the U.S. and U.K. 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 specter of Syria and Iran before us,” said Archbishop Tutu, who last week withdrew from a conference in South Africa due to Mr. Blair’s presence at the event.

While the International Criminal Court can handle cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, it does not currently have the jurisdiction to prosecute crimes of aggression. Any potential prosecution over the Iraq war would likely come under the aggression category.

The U.S. is among nations which do not recognize the International Criminal Court.

In response to Archbishop Tutu, Mr. Blair said he had great respect for the archbishop’s work to tackle apartheid in South Africa, but accused him of repeating inaccurate criticisms of the Iraq war.

“To repeat the old canard that we lied about the intelligence is completely wrong as every single independent analysis of the evidence has shown,” Mr. Blair said. “And to say that the fact that Saddam (deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein) massacred hundreds of thousands of his citizens is irrelevant to the morality of removing him is bizarre.”

However, Mr. Blair said that “in a healthy democracy people can agree to disagree.”

In Britain, a two-year long inquiry examining the buildup to the Iraq war and its conduct is yet to publish its final report. The panel took evidence from political leaders including Mr. Blair, military chiefs and intelligence officers. Two previous British studies into aspects of the war cleared Mr. Blair’s government of wrongdoing.

The Iraq war was bitterly divisive in the U.K. and saw large public demonstrations. However, Mr. Blair subsequently won a 2005 national election, though with a reduced majority.