1 Boring Old Man

Clegg’s ‘illegal’ comment sparks calls for Blair trial
Morning Star UK
by Louise Nousratpour
22 July 2010

Anti-war campaigners have challenged Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg to act on his belief that the invasion of Iraq was illegal by making sure those responsible were tried for war crimes, including Tony Blair. Mr Clegg shocked his pro-war coalition partners on Wednesday when he declared the US-led invasion "illegal" while standing in for David Cameron at Prime Minister’s questions. During heated exchanges with Labour’s shadow justice secretary Jack Straw, who was Tony Blair’s foreign secretary when the war began, he said: "Perhaps one day you could account for your role in the most disastrous decision of all, which is the illegal invasion of Iraq." But the Deputy Prime Minister was later forced to clarify his position by insisting that he was speaking in a personal capacity even though he was filling in for Mr Cameron, who is on an official visit to the US.

Lawyer Philippe Sands warned that Mr Clegg’s remarks made from the government’s dispatch box in the Commons would be "a statement that an international court would be interested in, in forming a view as to whether or not the war was lawful." Stop The War Coalition chairman Andrew Murry said: "Nick Clegg has only said what is common knowledge in every living room across the land – that the Iraq war was illegal." The Deputy Prime Minister should now use his authority to ensure that those responsible for this gross breach of international law, Tony Blair above all, are brought to justice." Rail union RMT leader Bob Crow added: "If Clegg wants to maintain any credibility he will have to commit the government to the earliest possible date for the withdrawal of our troops from the chaos of Afghanistan before more lives are needlessly lost"…

So Philippe Sands says Mr Clegg’s remarks constituted "a statement that an international court would be interested in, in forming a view as to whether or not the war was lawful." One wonders which International Court he’s referring to? The UN World Court is voluntary and shies away from contentious cases. The International Criminal Court is embryonic, and hasn’t yet formally taken on the "Crime of Aggression." So I guess we could amend Sands comment to say, "… a statement that an international court would be interested in, if there were one."

But it really doesn’t matter whether Nick Clegg is speaking as Deputy Prime Minister, as a Member of Parliament, or just a guy. As Andrew Murray said, "Nick Clegg has only said what is common knowledge in every living room across the land – that the Iraq war was illegal." And people seem to do with The Law whatever suits them. Nick Clegg says the War in Iraq is "illegal," so Rail union leader Bob Crow added: "If Clegg wants to maintain any credibility he will have to commit the government to the earliest possible date for the withdrawal of our troops from the chaos of Afghanistan before more lives are needlessly lost." Well, Iraq and Afghanistan are, after all, both wars.

The point here is that in the International Arena, The Law has yet to be defined. If anything decent comes from this painful first decade of the 21st century, it will be the time when a need for an International version of The Law finally moved to the front burner. I think it a supreme irony that the Bush Administration was openly trying to insert the US as the world’s Sole Superpower after the fall of the Communist Bloc. But their real legacy may well be to make it very clear that the world can do without Superpowers altogether. Superpowers believe themselves to be The Law, or above The Law. That’s what this whole story of the invasion of Iraq with its "regime change" and the assassination of Saddam Hussein is about. We’ve had quite enough of Superpowers, thank you very much…