Sometimes you find something fascinating in your personal archives. Given Tony Blair’s evidence today I searched my hard drive for anything I had written on Iraq and found this 2002 letter to my then MP:
16th August 2002, To: Colin Challen MP
Saddam Hussein is a butcher. He is a madman. He shows scant disregard for common humanity. He has proved in attacking his own people in Halaja in 1988 that he is willing to use weapons of mass destruction. He proved in his invasion of Kuwait he has no respect for the norms of international behaviour. He has proved throughout his reign of internal repression he has no respect for international expectations on human rights. On balance, Iraq and the world would far be better off without him.
I therefore have every sympathy with the Bush regime that the ‘ends’ of a regime change within Iraq is desirable. My issue is with the ‘means’ of achieving that ‘ends’.
Since the end of the second world war international law has developed to allow the use of force in (broadly) only one of two circumstances: self-defence or with the support of the United Nations Security Council. The world has been more secure for the development of these rules. It was the international consensus on exactly these principles that originally gave such weight to the international effort to remove Saddam from Kuwait in 1991.
Before nations reached this understanding justification for resorting to state violence was broadly understood to lie with ‘Jus Bellum’ or ‘Just Cause’. This dates pretty much to the Crusades. The problem with this is that “Jus Bellum” has no arbitrator. The victor will always declare a “Jus Bellum”. Hitler certainly saw a “Jus Bellum” in taking on Poland for instance. Yet it seems the US administration is hell bent on taking us backwards to this medieval concept. They are convinced of the morality of their case and will push ahead regardless.
I reiterate that I agree that in isolation there is a strong moral case. However, for the love of god, can they not think through the consequences of setting this precedent? When the only remaining super-power abandons a ‘norm of international behaviour’ then that norm can no longer be considered to be part of the fabric of international law.
Once this genie is out the bottle, what if China sees a clear moral cause in stopping Taiwan? What if India sees a just cause in taking out the Pakistan leadership? Do we really have no joined-up thinking on this?
The Prime Minister has been a remarkable and brave ally to our American friends since that terrible day a year ago. In observing his response throughout I was genuinely proud to be British.
Sometimes though, a friend needs guidance. Sometimes, a friend needs restraint. Sometimes speaking ones mind can be a greater show of true loyalty than blind obedience. I pray all those who influence the Prime Minister will impress upon him the importance not to sleep walk into a war. I pray that he will use the influence and trust he has with the US administration to put forward another way. If the moral case for removing Saddam is so compelling then take it to the UN, get approval, and use all the might at our disposal to get the job done. If the UN cannot be convinced then may I suggest that we take a step back. The sum intelligence and consideration of all other nations is probably wiser than we give them credit in our western arrogance. If there is not support for our ‘cast iron’ moral case then maybe the case isn’t as strong as it seems to us here and stateside still so angry about events last year to those who can remove emotion from their thinking.
The undoubted benefit and extra security brought by the US unilateral forced removal of Saddam to the globe, would in my opinion be dwarfed by the insecurity created by the abandonment of international law and a return to a ‘might is right’ nuclear era of international relations.”
On the one hand I am amused at myself for thinking that a letter to a backbench MP was a constructive use of my time. On the other I find this pretty strong reading. Between my writing this letter and the start of the actual War – Tony Blair somehow managed to convince me that we ‘had to do it’ – and somehow his ‘trust me Tony’ chutzpah had me as a supporter by the eve of the War. I’ll watch proceedings today with great interest and try and figure out how he managed to do that.