- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
- John Boehner says GOP should support gay candidates: ‘I do’
- Grass-Whopper: Pan-fried cricket burgers go over big in New York City
- CDC sees measles spike and ‘failure to vaccinate’
- Ex-Secret Service agent seeking Md. seat: Everyone’s a ‘de facto criminal’ now
- New prosthetic hand technology lets amputees feel again
WikiLeaks: Libya threatened Britain over bomber release
LONDON (AP) — The British government feared a furious Libyan reaction if the convicted Lockerbie bomber wasn’t set free and expressed relief when it learned that he would be released on compassionate grounds, leaked U.S. diplomatic cables show.
A cache of cables from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli describes the run-up to the decision to free Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi, a former Libyan agent whose freedom on Aug. 20, 2009, sparked jubilation in Libya but roiled relations between London and Washington.
Critics of the decision on both sides of the Atlantic have claimed that British officials were motivated by commercial interests — including those of energy company BP PLC — when they moved to free al-Megrahi, the only man convicted in the 1988 attack on Pan Am Flight 103.
While officials here have always stressed that the 58-year-old al-Megrahi was released because he suffers from terminal prostate cancer, the cables show the British were keenly aware that they faced a hugely damaging backlash if they didn’t do as the Libyans wanted.
Britain was caught “between a rock and a hard place,” an Oct. 24, 2008, U.S. cable warned. “The Libyans have told HMG (Her Majesty's Government) flat out that there will be ‘enormous repercussions’ for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if (al-)Megrahi’s early release is not handled properly.”
“They could have cut us off at the knees, just like the Swiss,” the cable quotes Mr. Fean as saying.
Mr. Fean seemed to be referring to the Swiss detention of Moammar Gadhafi’s son and daughter-in-law in July 2008 for assaults on their servants in Geneva — arrests that sparked a spectacular collapse of relations between the two countries. Tripoli suspended visas for Swiss citizens, withdrew funds from Swiss banks, stopped oil shipments, reduced flights to Switzerland, and imprisoned two Swiss businessmen in retaliation — forcing Switzerland into an embarrassing apology.
British officials have long acknowledged that commercial interests — as well the desire to deepen anti-terrorism cooperation — played a role in the U.K.-Libyan prisoner transfer agreement which first raised the prospect of al-Megrahi’s release.
But they have always stressed that the decision to release al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds was made independent of that deal, and that, in any case, officials in the Scottish capital of Edinburgh had the final say on whether to set him free.
Scotland has insisted that its decision was made on humanitarian grounds alone, although one cable does suggest that Libya tried to lean on the Scottish Executive to do its bidding.
Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond is quoted in the cables as telling a U.S. official that the Libyan government had offered the Scottish government “a parade of treats” in return for a deal on al-Megrahi’s release — although he was also quoted as saying the inducements were turned down.
Mr. Salmond’s office on Wednesday said he had been misquoted in the cable.
“There were no ‘parade of treats,’” an e-mail from Salmond’s office said. “He never said that at any stage.”
- Activists urge Obama to go rogue, sidestep Congress
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- PRUDEN: British press horrified as London's new mayor dares to proclaim the truth
- Budget negotiators look to federal workers for benefit concessions
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- New battlefront emerges in war between Republicans, tea party
- 'Hunger Games' delivers Obama's message on income inequality
- GOP launches candidate training: How to talk to women
- KNIGHT: Can the ACLU force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions?
- NAPOLITANO: Pope Francis should be saving souls, not pocketbooks
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Political satirist and Christian apologist Bob Siegel discusses religion and politics.
Politics, economics, and business from a real world perspective.
The world impacts us. What happens in our towns, cities, states, country and on this planet makes a difference to us.
Find the latest news and happening that effect those in the Washington D.C., Northern Virginia and Maryland Metro region.
White House pets gone wild!