MI6: Iraq War “Inextricably Tied” to Israel

18 Jul

The decision to wage war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was “inextricably tied” up with the “problems” created by Israel, a now-declassified but formerly top secret letter from the UK’s foreign intelligence unit, MI6, stated back in 2001.
The document, sent by the private secretary of MI6 head Richard Dearlove, to Sir David Manning, former UK Ambassador to the United States, was revealed as part of the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War.
The Chilcot Inquiry—which, to no one’s surprise, found that former UK prime minister Tony Blair had misled the country, parliament, and the world about the true nature of Iraq’s nonexistent “weapons of mass destruction”—deferred from making any direct reference to the Jewish lobby’s proven role in fomenting the Iraq War, although Israel is mentioned hundreds of times in its supporting documents.
In the memo, dated December 3, 2001, titled “Letter from Richard Dearlove’s Private Secretary to Sir David Manning,” and stamped as “TOP SECRET, Declassified April 2011,” under the section “Attachment 1 to [letter] of 3 December 2001,” the following conclusion appears:
Iraq policy is inextricably tied up with the problem of Israel.

Further in the document, the memo admits that UK and US policy applies double standards, in that they seek to prosecute war against Iraq for allegedly having WMDs, but ignore Israel which actually does have WMDs:
IRAQ: Further thoughts
Iraq policy has got bogged down in talk about double standards over Israel and WMD.

Under the section titled “US ATTACKS ON IRAQ: THE RISKS AND COSTS,” the memo also admits that the US and UK face the risk of:
Accusations of double standards (one law for the Israelis; another for the Arabs).

In the section title “WHY MOVE?,” the memo goes on to say that
The removal of Saddam remains a prize because it . . . .[will] remove a threat to Jordan/Israel . . . [and that ]. . . [W]orking for regime change could be a dynamic process of alliance building which could effect climatic change in the Arab-Israeli conflict.”

Under a section titled “OUR AIMS FOR THE REGION,” the memo goes on to state that
Behind this Iraqi agenda lies two further aims: climatic change in the psychology of regimes in the region, a precondition for progress in the Arab-Israel dispute . . . The problem of WMD is an element in driving for action against Iraq. In turn, this should open prospects for Arab-Israeli talks….

Under the heading “THE STRATEGIC VIEW,” the MI6 memo states that
Iraq, like Syria and Iran, has significant link [sic] with Russia; a resonance throughout the Islamic world for opposition to US and Israel . . .

Throughout the declassified documents, there are literally hundreds of references to the supposed threat that Iraq’s mythical WMDs and its equally mythical “chemical and biological weapons” (CBW) posed to Israel.

READ Border Walls and Turkish Hypocrisy

The Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC)—part of the British Cabinet Office responsible for directing the country’s national intelligence organizations—is quoted time and time again making this point:
JIC Assessment, 9 September 2002
Key Judgements
1. Saddam is prepared to order missile strikes against Israel, with chemical or biological warheads, in order to widen the war once hostilities begin.

And in 2002, the JIC claimed that Israel would be Iraq’s “first target.”
JIC Assessment, 6 December 2002 IRAQ: MILITARY OPTIONS
1. Saddam would use chemical and biological weapons (CBW) if he faced defeat. He might also use them earlier in a conflict, including against coalition forces, neighbouring states and his own people. Israel could be his first target.
Missiles and CBW.
2. Iraq is assessed to have retained up to 20 Al Hussein missiles with a 650km range, though their condition is not known (See Annex for further details). Given the limited number of these missiles, we judge that Iraq would use them principally against Israel.

Another one of many references was in March 2003:
JIC Note
This note was prepared by the Assessments Staff following discussion at the JIC on 19 March 2003
12. Saddam might judge that an early attack on Israel would draw in support from Arab nations. […] show Israel to be among the targets for Iraqi missile attack.

A JIC report for November 28, 2001, also confirms that Saddam Hussein was supporting the Palestinian resistance to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and that this was another reason why Iraq had to be destroyed:
JIC Assessment, 28 November 2001
The wider picture
11. Against Israel, however, there is a clearer picture of state sponsorship of terrorism:
Iraq has maintained its links with a wide range of mostly secular Palestinian rejectionist groups.

Another JIC report for April 2002 reveals that Arab states are all aware of the “double standards” which the UK and US apply to Israel, and that this makes Arab support for the invasion of Iraq “impossible.”
JIC Assessment, 19 April 2002
Key Judgements
I. The current Israeli/Palestinian crisis makes Arab support for an attack on Iraq politically impossible at present. There is no sign that strong anti-US sentiment will dissipate quickly, even if there is progress towards an equitable resolution to the Palestinian issue.
The effect of the Israel/Palestine crisis
1. Arab attitudes towards Iraq, and particularly towards any prospective US-led attack, are inextricably linked to bilateral relations with the US, events on the ground in the Occupied Territories and perceived Western “double standards” in favour of Israel.

Furthermore, a JIC assessment for July 2001, said that the “US is compromised by its support for Israel.”
JIC Assessment, 25 July 2001
1. Iraq’s isolation has diminished. Land, sea and air transport links are being revived. Wider Arab sympathy for Iraq is bolstered by Saddam’s championing of Palestinian rights, the widespread Arab perception that the US is compromised by its support for Israel, and false propaganda about incidents in the No Fly Zone.

Even Tony Blair admitted that Israel was always “first on the agenda” at his regular meetings with US president George Bush when they were planning the war—and that Israeli officials even took part in these conferences.

READ Istanbul Airport: Russia’s Muslim Terrorists

A transcript of Blair’s evidence, given to the inquiry on January, 29, 2010, makes this clear:
Friday, 29 January 2010 (9.30 am)
BARONESS USHA PRASHAR: Can we then come to Crawford? Because you had one-to-one discussions with President Bush without any advisers present. Can you tell us what was decided at these discussions?
RT HON TONY BLAIR: As I recall that discussion, it was less to do with specifics about what we were going to do on Iraq or, indeed, the Middle East, because the Israel issue was a big, big issue at the time. I think, in fact, I remember, actually, there may have been conversations that we had even with Israelis, the two of us, whilst we were there. So that was a major part of all this.
The official confirmation from these previously secret government documents cements the facts which prove that the most significant human rights abuses of the early twenty-first century can be unequivocally blamed on Tony Blair, George W. Bush, and the Israel-supporting Jewish lobby in both the United Kingdom and the United States.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: