admin
The Nobel Peace Prize winner accused the former British and US leaders of lying about weapons of mass destruction and said the invasion left the world more destabilised and divided “than any other conflict in history”.
Writing in yesterday’s Observer, he claimed that the 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.
He said: “The then leaders of the United States and Great Britain 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.”
As for the call for Blair and Bush to face justice in The Hague, he said different standards appeared to be set for prosecuting African leaders than western ones.
The death toll during and after the Iraq conflict was sufficient on its own for them to face action, he claimed.
Archbishop Tutu added: “On these grounds alone, in a consistent world, those responsible 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.”
A long-time critic of the Iraq war, he pulled out of a South African conference on leadership last week because Mr Blair was attending.
In response, Blair said: “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 child mortality rate cut by a third of what it was,” he said. — Daily Mail.
Bongani Ndlovu
Online Reporter