Sundaymail Editor
By Sean O’Reilly
Special Correspondent
DOUBLE standards and hypocrisy in British diplomacy is nothing new.
The Brits built an empire on subterfuge, sleight of hand and, of course, the use of brute force.
As they lauded themselves for their evolving democracy at home, they saw nothing amiss in the manner in which their colonial adventurism — justified even today by so many of the “effete elite” as “bringing enlightenment to the heathen masses” suppressed hundreds of millions across the globe, denying them, for decades and decades, even the most basic tenets of such democracy.
“Ah”, they say, when confronted with the stark reality of British colonial excesses which, today, would certainly constitute both genocide and crimes against humanity, “but that was then . . . things were different . . . the world was a different place, my dear fellow”.
The fact that the sun finally set on that empire has in no way diluted the nostalgia of the British ruling class for that moment in history when Britannia actually did rule the waves.
They still like to lord it over their foams possessions and, turning a very Nelson-esque blind eye to their own egregious shortcomings in so many areas of democratic governance, rule of law and accountability, delight in pointing critical fingers and imposing punitive retribution or, as they like to call them “restrictive measures” on their former colonial subjects.
“Ours is a values-based foreign policy,” they will say, “with human rights, rule of law and accountability at the very core of British ethos”.
“Play by our rules or you get red-carded.”
In February this year, Britain escaped the cloying clutches of the European Union (EU) and, in a demonstration of their new-found independence, promptly imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe.
Nothing major, perhaps, just four senior officials placed on the UK’s “negative list”.
But, a signal none the less.
In justifying this demonstration of the UK’s newly recovered power to determine, unilaterally, its foreign policy objectives and the victims to be targeted thereby, the colourless Dominic Raab — without doubt the most invisible, unimpressive and ineffective UK Foreign Secretary of modem times —repeatedly referred to British concerns about rule of law, governance and accountability issues in Zimbabwe.
There was repeated, specific mention of the tragic events of 1 August 2018, and the findings and recommendations of the Motlanthe Commission of Inquiry which followed thereupon.
“The sanctions were being imposed”, intoned Raab, “because, almost three years after the event, the Mnangagwa Administration had still not brought to book those responsible for the civilian deaths on 1 August, 2018, or held anyone accountable for the shootings.”
The lack of urgency manifested by the Mnangagwa Government on this manor implied a sense of impunity with regard to the actions of the security forces.
There was need for justice to be done and to be seen to be done. The victims’ families deserved no less. Someone must be held accountable’. All very righteous and “values-based”.
But, in reality, once again, a stunningly hypocritical dose of British double-speak, and an imperial “do as we say . . . not as we do” approach to a former colonial territory.
As Raab was penning his justification spiel, others within his government were preparing for the legal whitewashing of the unjustified and unjustifiable. Killings of “unarmed” and “entirely innocent” civilians in the streets of Belfast and Derry, Northern Ireland, during the so-called “Troubles”.
More than 3 500 people died during the conflict which erupted in the late 1960’s and only ended with the signature of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998.
Between 9 and 11 August, 1971, members of the 1st Battalion, Parachute Regiment (1 Para), shot and killed 10 unarmed civilians in the Ballymurphy area of Belfast.
On 30 January, 1972, in what became known as Bloody Sunday, members of the same Regiment shot and killed 26 unarmed civilians in the streets of Derry, as they marched in protest against the British government’s policy of mass internment-without-trial.
Inquests held shortly after both mass-killings returned “open verdicts”, mainly on the basis of blatantly false testimony given by the British military and never accepted by the families of those killed or by the generality of British, Irish and international human rights organisations.
Public pressure — and only public pressure — forced the British government to “revisit” the two events.
The 12-year Saville Inquiry (1998-2010) into the Bloody Sunday killings, and a formal Coroner’s Inquest (2021) into the Ballymurphy massacre, respectively, completely dismissed the earlier whitewashes and ruled that, in both cases, the killings were “unjustified and unjustifiable”, that” all those shot were unarmed” and “entirely innocent.”
For 50 years, and even to this day, no one has been held accountable.
Whereas in the light of these findings, the Crown Prosecution Service was finally constrained to bring charges against six as yet unidentified ex-soldiers with regard to British military atrocities committed in Northern Ireland, the British Government is moving fast to introduce legislation putting an end to any and all such attempts to hold anyone accountable for those killings and indeed to stop any further investigations into any other possible or alleged atrocities committed by its armed forces during the Troubles.
Perhaps they were stung into action by the April resignation of Veteran’s Minister, Johnny Mercer — himself a former soldier — who accused his Cabinet colleagues of being “cowards” for hesitating to implement a long-standing Tory pledge to end “vexatious historical investigations” on veterans who served in Northern Ireland.
Now, his colleagues are moving.
In a Paper presented to Parliament in July, the UK’s Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, stated that UK Government proposes to ‘ban all conflict-related prosecutions through the introduction of a statute of limitations, to apply equally to all Troubles-related incidents’.
The proposal would bring an immediate end to criminal investigations into Troubles-related offences and remove any prospect of prosecutions.
The whitewash continues. No one will ever be held accountable. British justice at its best?
British duplicity and hypocrisy at its most blatant certainly.
The families of those killed by the British military have reacted strongly to such moves, as has the Irish Government and all political parties in Northern Ireland’s devolved government.
Sinn Fein’s Michelle O’Neill, Deputy First Minister of Norther Ireland, expressed the disgust of many when she tweeted, “another cynical move that will put British forces beyond the law.
This is legal protection for those involved in state murder.
This is not acceptable.
On 10 August, UN human rights experts, including the Special Rapporteurs within the Office of the High Commissioner responsible for “the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence”, and — extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions”, respectively, expressed “serious concern” about what they described as “blanket impunity” to address Northern Ireland’s Troubles legacy.
The UK Government’s plan “would effectively institute a de-facto amnesty and blanket impunity for the grave human rights violations committed during that
“We express grave concern that the plan outlined in July’s statement forecloses the pursuit of justice and accountability for the serious human rights violations committed doting the Troubles and thwarts victims’ rights to truth and to an effective remedy for the harm suffered, placing the United Kingdom in flagrant violation of its international obligations”.
The experts urged the British authorities to “refrain from regressing on their international human rights obligations through the establishment of a smite of limitations for conflict-related prosecutions and boring all related investigations, inquests and civil claims.
With the supreme arrogance derived from Empire, these exhortations from noted Human Rights experts — whom the British Government has no hesitation whatsoever in setting-upon those, like Zimbabwe, with whom it has deep-rooted historical “issues” — am likely to be simply ignored. Britannia must Rule, old boy.
But, as the year moves towards its end and as London, Brussels and Washington prepare, individually, to review their collective long-standing punitive sanctions on Zimbabwe, and as they dredge up justification for further prolonging these patently unjust measures, the blatant hypocrisy and hollowness of the human rights, rule-of-law and accountability argument religiously paraded by all three should give them all pause to reflect deeply, and honestly — if dust is at all possible — and to do the right thing by a courageous, gifted and proud nation.
Online Reporter