Reaction to Libyan PM's denial of Lockerbie guilt

[What follows is an article published in The New York Times on this date in 2004, the day after Libyan Prime Minister Shukri Ghanem had denied his country’s involvement in the Lockerbie bombing:]

Libya's prime minister, Shukri Ghanem, brought the thaw in relations between his nation and the West to a sudden standstill on Tuesday by suggesting that Libya was not responsible for the Lockerbie bombing and other major acts of terrorism, even though it has agreed to pay compensation to victims' families and accepted responsibility in writing.

The Bush administration reacted strongly, demanding a retraction. And some of Mr Ghanem's close associates in government told Western colleagues, one of them said, that the prime minister might be forced to resign over the remarks, which cut against the grain of the country's rapprochement with the West.

In an interview with BBC radio on Tuesday morning, Mr Ghanem, speaking from the Libyan capital, Tripoli, said that ''we thought it was easier for us to buy peace'' with the United States and Britain, ''and this is why we agreed on compensation'' in the Lockerbie case.

Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 270 people, mostly Americans.

Mr Ghanem also said he believed that Libya was not responsible for the death of a British policewoman, Yvonne Fletcher, killed in front of the Libyan Embassy in 1984. Libya formally accepted ''general responsibility'' for Ms Fletcher's death in 1999 as part of the agreement to re-establish relations with Britain.

The Bush administration had been expected to lift the longstanding ban on travel to Libya this week, but White House and State Department officials pointedly put off any announcement on Tuesday. Instead, they demanded that the Libyan government disassociate itself from the prime minister's statements.

''We would expect a retraction from the Libyan government,'' said Richard A Boucher, the State Department spokesman.

''We, and the United Nations, demanded that Libya formally accept responsibility for the actions of its officials in the Pan Am 103 bombing,'' he said. ''Libya did so in a letter that had no ambiguity to the United Nations Security Council on Aug 15, 2003.''

Mr. Ghanem's remarks represented the first serious setback since the Libyan leader, Col Muammar el-Qaddafi, declared on Dec 19 that Libya would abandon all attempts to develop unconventional weapons and was seeking a new relationship with the West. He was congratulated by President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, who is expected to meet with Colonel Qaddafi in the spring.

American and British intelligence officials have worked intensively since January to dismantle, evacuate or prepare for destruction Libya's illicit weapons technologies, and American and British officials have praised Libya's cooperation, as Jack Straw, the British foreign secretary, did again on Tuesday. American officials have also taken the first steps toward re-establishing diplomatic representation in Tripoli.

Mr Straw seemed at pains to place greater emphasis on the written statements the Libyan government has rendered.

''We take account of the reported remarks of the Libyan prime minister, but we take even greater account of the formal communications from the government of Libya,'' he said.

But the Bush administration took a markedly stronger line. Mr Boucher said the prime minister's statements, if not withdrawn, would ''certainly'' be ''a factor that we would need to take into account as we decide how to proceed'' with Libya. He indicated that other steps in improving relations, like the lifting of sanctions, could not proceed without clarification.

''We need to understand that the Libyan position is the one they stated authoritatively to the United Nations in writing, for all the other steps to continue apace,'' he said.

One close associate of Mr Ghanem in Europe said the prime minister was ''inexperienced'' in diplomacy and somewhat ''argumentative'' in the position Colonel Qaddafi created for him last June to encourage an economic reform program.

Mr Ghanem is considered to be one of the most progressive members of Colonel Qaddafi's government, and some experts suggested that those who oppose his reforms may be among the first to call for his resignation on Wednesday.

One of his Western friends said Mr Ghanem, an economist who studied in the United States and worked in Vienna for OPEC, had privately said that if he believed that his government was responsible for blowing up Flight 103, then he could not serve it.

Libyan secret files to be made public, says envoy

[A report published today on the website of the London Evening Standard contains the following:]

Yvonne Fletcher's alleged killers will face justice in Libya, the country's top diplomat said today.

In an exclusive interview, Mahmud Nacua told the Standard: "They will face justice in Libya, not in Britain.

"Libya is an independent country, it has its constitution, it has its law, its lawyers."

He also said that "secret files" on the 1984 murder of Pc Fletcher, the Lockerbie bombing and Gaddafi-sponsored assassinations in London will soon be made public.

Restoration of diplomatic relations with Libya

[The following are three snippets from this date in 1999 that appear on the Libya: News and Views website:]

The UK has announced it is restoring full diplomatic links with Libya after a break of 15 years. The move follows the Libyan Government's acceptance of "general responsibility" for the killing of policewoman Yvonne Fletcher, who was shot dead outside its London embassy in 1984. It has also agreed to pay substantial compensation to the Fletcher family and to co-operate in the investigation to find the killer. The compensation is understood to reach six figures, although the actual amount is not being revealed. [BBC]

Libya's UN ambassador on Wednesday attributed Libya's thaw in relations with Britain to Tripoli's surrender of two suspects in the Lockerbie bombing case and said it was time UN sanctions were lifted. Ambassador Abuzed Omar Dorda said a resumption of ties with Britain, announced by British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, “is the natural thing.” Dorda was reacting to Cook's announcement on Wednesday that London was resuming diplomatic relations with Libya after Tripoli agreed to cooperate in police investigations into the 1984 shooting of a British policewoman outside Libya's embassy in London. Cook told parliament Libya had also agreed to pay compensation for the killing. [Reuters]

The United States will not follow Britain's example and resume ties with Libya, at least until Tripoli offers compensation for the Americans killed over Lockerbie in 1988, the State Department said on Wednesday. Britain is reopening diplomatic relations after 15 years because Tripoli has agreed to cooperate in police investigations into the fatal shooting in 1984 of a British policewoman outside Libya's embassy in London. In Washington, US State Department spokesman James Foley noted the Libyan concessions and said the United States would seek the same for the families of victims of Pan Am flight 103, which blew up over Lockerbie in Scotland. [Reuters]

Libya may bar UK police from visiting to investigate Lockerbie bombing

[This is the headline over a report just published on the website of The Guardian.  It reads in part:]

Interior minister says Britain should answer questions about its relationship with Gaddafi before UK police are allowed to visit

Libya has all but closed the door on allowing British police to travel to the country to investigate the Lockerbie bombing and the killing of the police officer Yvonne Fletcher.

The interior minister, Fawzi Abdel A'al, said there was no treaty allowing UK police to visit Libya, and any agreement at some future date might depend on whether Britain answered questions about its past involvement with Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

"There is no treaty between Britain and Libya to allow such a thing," he said in an interview with The Guardian and Agence France Presse. (…) [RB : The AFP report can be read here.]

Discussing Lockerbie and the release of the convicted bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds, he said: "Didn't America and Britain accept millions of dollars from Gaddafi as the price to end this case? Who let Abdelbaset al-Megrahi go? Did we? (…)

He said Britain needed to explain the reasons for the rapprochement between Britain and the Gaddafi regime in 2004, sealed when the former prime minister Tony Blair visited Libya.

"Why did the British government improve its relations with Gaddafi? Something happened in this case between the former Libyan regime and the British government to end this dispute. Didn't the former British prime minister Tony Blair visit Libya more than one time? Saif al-Islam [Gaddafi's son] came out one time in a statement to say that Blair was an adviser to his father. Blair was an adviser to Gaddafi after he left the government."

Abdel A'al, a former Misratan district attorney who is seen by diplomats as a high flier in Libya's cabinet, was appointed to the job in November and has access to tens of thousands of files detailing the Gaddafi regime's dealings with foreign powers.

He said he might consent to an investigation by Libyan authorities without the involvement of UK police.

"We see that the best way to solve this now is that the British government ask the Libyan authorities to open an investigation inside Libya, and for the Libyan side to hand in all the information they have on this case so the Libyan authorities can start investigations."

His statement is likely to be viewed as a setback to both the Metropolitan police, investigating the 1984 killing of Fletcher by shots fired from the London Libyan embassy, and Scottish police wanting to pursue the bombing of a Pan Am flight over Lockerbie in 1988.

In December the minister for the Middle East, Alistair Burt, met Abdel A'al in Tripoli and announced that Libya had agreed to allow UK investigators to visit Libya.

Instead, Libya's authorities seem to have decided against it, although the governing National Transitional Council is due to hand over to an elected government in elections expected in June.

UK to discuss bomber with Libyans

[This is the headline over a Press Association news agency report issued yesterday evening.  It reads in part:]

Ministers will discuss the Lockerbie bomber's fate with their Libyan counterparts following the death of toppled dictator Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, MPs have been told.

Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt said the legal position of Libyan agent Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi appeared to have been settled, but said it was one of several topics Britain planned to raise with the Arab country's new leadership, including supplying explosives to Irish terrorists and the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984.

Mr Burt told the Commons: "There are two or three legacy issues which need to be dealt with, not only that (Megrahi), but also issues in relation to the provision of Semtex to the IRA and the death of WPC Fletcher.

"All these will be considered. It's an important part of the new bilateral relationship between the UK and Libya, but not all these issues are presently settled.

"The legal position of Mr Al Megrahi appears to have been settled by past actions, but the legacy issues will be examined anew by this Government and the new government of the National Transitional Council." (...)

US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has called for Megrahi to be sent back to Scotland in the aftermath of Col Gaddafi's death last week.

[The report on this matter in today's edition of The Herald can be read here.]

Senussi extradition could help Lockerbie inquiry

[This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of The Herald. The following is an excerpt:]

Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland travelled to Libya in April to meet Prime Minister Abdurrahim el-Keib and pave the way for the new Lockerbie inquiry, announced last autumn.

A statement from the Crown Office said: "We note the position in relation to the extradition of Senussi to Libya and we will continue to liaise with our colleagues in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, as well as the Libyan authorities, to pursue all available lines of inquiry."

It would not be drawn on whether active steps were being made to interview Senussi, who has been accused of crimes against humanity – including murder and persecution – by the International Criminal Court.

[The Scotsman’s report contains the following:]

(...)  his trial may also make some feel uncomfortable – he may reveal the details of the rapprochement brokered during the famous “meeting in the desert” between Gaddafi and former prime minister Tony Blair in 2004, which saw international sanctions lifted.

Senussi will also have the answers to what part Abdulbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who died in Tripoli earlier this year, played in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing – and will be able to answer questions about whether the deal to send Megrahi back to Libya was linked to concessions for British oil companies.

[The following are excerpts from the report in The Times (behind the paywall):]

Western diplomats said the Libyan Government would also face inquiries from Britain, the US and France over al-Senussi’s knowledge of international crimes linked to the Gaddafi regime.

These include the bombing of Pan Am Flight 174 over Lockerbie, the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher and the bombing of a French airliner over Niger in 1989 — for which al-Senussi was convicted in absentia by a French court. (...)

A British Foreign Office spokesman said last night: “There are a number of open UK police investigations in relation to the activities of the Gaddafi regime. The police will follow the evidence wherever it leads and we will continue to provide them what support we can. The Libyan authorities are in no doubt of the importance the UK attaches to seeing progress made on these investigations.”

[The report in The Independent contains the following:]

The French government has already sentenced Mr Senussi to life imprisonment after a case heard in absentia, involving the shooting down of a UTA airliner over Niger in 1989 in which 170 people were killed. It has also been claimed that he was involved in the destruction of the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie.

However, Libya became a staunch ally of the West against Islamists following the rapprochement with Gaddafi led by the US and UK, and Mr Senussi will have details of co-operation which could cause embarrassment on both sides of the Atlantic if aired publicly.

Abdul Hakim Belhaj, a former head of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, is currently suing the British Government and senior officials in this country over his rendition to Libya.

Earlier this year, US House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who led a delegation to the region, said Washington had a "particular interest" in seeing Mr Senussi arrested "because of his role with the Lockerbie bombing".

There are, however, doubts over Libyan culpability in the attack, with strong feeling among many close to the case that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted of the bombing.

[A report in the Daily Telegraph can be read here.]

Shell drafted letter Tony Blair sent to Gaddafi while Prime Minister

[This is the headline over a report published on 27 April 2010 on the website of The Times. It reads in part:]

Tony Blair lobbied Colonel Muammar Gaddafi on behalf of Shell in a letter written for him in draft form by the oil company, documents obtained by The Times reveal.

The correspondence, written while Mr Blair was Prime Minister, bears a striking resemblance to a briefing note by Royal Dutch Shell weeks earlier promoting a $500 million (£325 million) deal it was trying to clinch in Libya.

While it is common for government ministers to champion British interests abroad, Shell’s draft reveals an unusual assurance in its ability to dictate Mr Blair’s conversation with the Libyan leader. It also raises questions about the motives behind Britain’s improved relations with Libya and the subsequent release of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber. Lockerbie victims have claimed that the Government paved the way for al-Megrahi’s release as part of a deal with Libya to give British companies access to Libya’s lucrative oil and gas industry.

In the draft, Shell tells Mr Blair to discuss positive progress on weapons of mass destruction as well as the investigation into the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London in 1984. (...)

The Cabinet Office would release only a part of Mr Blair’s official letter but the section on Shell sounds very similar to the draft. “I understand that the necessary technical discussions with the relevant authorities in Libya have been completed satisfactorily,” it states. “All that is needed now are final decisions by the [Libyan] General People’s Committee to go ahead.” The Libyan Cabinet agreed the Shell deal shortly after this letter was written and the contract was signed in May 2005.

Both letters were released after a lengthy Freedom of Information process. The Times first asked for them after al-Megrahi was released last August on compassionate grounds by the Scottish Government, which said that he had only months to live.

Al-Megrahi, who killed 270 people on board Pan Am flight 103 in 1988, celebrated his 58th birthday in Tripoli last month. There was speculation that his release was part of a deal struck between Britain and Libya to improve diplomatic ties between the countries.

The Government denied this, although it emerged that Britain and Libya had signed a prisoner transfer deal in 2007 that included al-Megrahi. Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary at the time, said that al-Megrahi had been included in the transfer deal “in view of the overwhelming interests of the UK”. (...)

Last September The Times requested all communication between the Department for Business and these companies. A limited number were released in December. One was an email from Shell to UK Trade & Investment dated September 2004 complaining of slow progress with its Libyan deal. Just months earlier Mr Blair and Colonel Gaddafi had met in a tent outside Tripoli to end Libya’s diplomatic isolation.

Miliband admits Megrahi jail fear

[This is the headline over a report on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]

The UK government thought the national interest would be "damaged" if the Lockerbie bomber had died in prison, the foreign secretary has said.

Libyan Abdelbasset Ali al-Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds by the Scottish government in August.

But David Miliband told the Commons he "rejected" claims that any pressure had been applied by the UK government. (...)

Mr Miliband said that, because justice was a devolved matter and therefore dealt with by the Scottish government, the decision had been "for him [Mr MacAskill] to take and for him to take alone".

He added: "The government was clear that any attempt by us to pressure the Scottish Executive would have been wrong."

He said he wanted to address the "unfounded allegation" that Britain had ignored Libya's past support for terrorism or that it had forgotten about IRA victims or the family of murdered police officer Yvonne Fletcher, shot by a gunman inside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984.

The Scottish government, run by the Scottish National Party (SNP), has said the decision to release Megrahi was made on compassionate grounds, as he has terminal cancer.

Mr Miliband told MPs: "Notwithstanding that any decision on release was for Scottish ministers and the Scottish judicial system, the UK government had a responsibility to consider the consequences of any Scottish decision.

"Although the decision was not one for the UK government, British interests, including those of UK nationals, British businesses and possibly security co-operation would be damaged, perhaps badly, if Megrahi were to die in a Scottish prison rather than Libya.

"Given the risk of Libyan adverse reaction we made it clear to them both that as a matter of law and practice it was not a decision for the UK government and as a matter of policy we were not seeking Megrahi's death in Scottish custody." (...)

Speaking in the Commons, the SNP's Westminster leader Angus Robertson, said the decision had been recommended by parole officers and had not been based "on political considerations".

A spokesman for Mr MacAskill said: "Kenny MacAskill took the right decisions for the right reasons, based on the due process of Scots law - including the recommendations of the parole board and prison governor, and the medical evidence.

"The foreign secretary has now made it clear that UK government policy was not in favour of al-Megrahi dying in Scotland.

"The UK Labour position played no role whatever in the justice secretary's decisions to reject prisoner transfer and grant compassionate release."

Libya: Why we should reserve our judgment

[This is the headline over an article by Linda S Heard, a specialist writer on Middle East affairs, published today on the Al Arabiya website. It reads in part:]

The danger for Libyan independence is that NATO member states may attempt to exact some type of quid-pro-quo from the post-Qaddafi leadership such as cheap oil and gas — or worse, permanent military bases. If NATO countries prove me wrong then I’m ready to take to the streets wrapped in the Atlantic Alliance’s flag. Right now, the signs don’t bode well on that score.

Firstly, now that the UN — and more importantly, the Arab League — has blessed the National Transitional Council (NTC) as a responsible caretaker government, there is no excuse for the NTC’s acting prime minister having to plead for the unfreezing of Libya’s assets abroad or being forced to account to foreign governments for the use those funds are put to.

Secondly, neither the US nor the UK has the moral — and doubtfully the legal — right to demand the extradition of the so-called Lockerbie Bomber Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi who has already had his day in court and who served his prison sentence in Scotland before being released on compassionate grounds. OK, so the man didn’t die from prostate cancer within the projected three months, which some in the US Congress interpreted as deceit or defiance, he’s now been tracked to his home where, hooked up to an oxygen bottle, he’s in a near-death coma.

Now some of those who were ghoulishly praying for his demise are upset because he may cheat the arm of the law. Similarly, some UK politicians have prioritized grabbing the Libyan suspected of shooting and killing Yvonne Fletcher a British policewoman in 1984 which is ironic when they’re advising the Libyan people to forgive the past and move on.

I’m comforted by the response of the NTC’s justice minister who confirmed within recent days that his government “will not give any Libyan citizen to the West” and “Al-Megrahi has already been judged once and will not be judged again.” Other council high-ups have fudged this issue. I think this will be a test of the NTC’s independence from their Western collaborators.

Libya is more dangerous than ever

[This is the headline over an article published today on the website of the Sri Lankan newspaper The Nation. The following are excerpts:]

It is less than three years since Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the former Libyan dictator, was murdered by his own people. His savage killing, which took place on 20 October 2011, near Sirte, was welcomed with almost sadistic relish by western politicians. RAF and French warplanes had “facilitated” the butchery, the despot’s corrupt and inhumane regime was gone, “friendly” rebels were in charge, and gung-ho TV news channels were there to record the celebrations. “Job done” was the reassuringly simplistic verdict.

Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President who had pressed for the Nato bombing campaign that guaranteed Gaddafi’s demise, was particularly jubilant. He was greeted as a “liberator” in Tripoli, along with David Cameron, Prime Minister of the country that had poured the most resources into the adventure – up to £900m of British taxpayers’ money according to some calculations.

Nobody would deny that an end to the Gaddafi regime was long overdue. It was characterized by numerous human rights abuses, including the murder of more than 1,000 prisoners – mainly political opponents – at the Abu Salim prison in 1996. Gaddafi was also linked with a long list of heinous crimes abroad, such as the bombing of Pan-Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 with the loss of 270 lives, and the murder of police officer Yvonne Fletcher in central London in 1984.

While UN Resolution 1973, the one that gave the green light to military intervention, had by no means authorized regime change, a dead Gaddafi heralded peace, prosperity and, crucially, a “strong and democratic future”, according to Cameron.How dismal all that sounds today. It was US air force jets flying above Tripoli this week, and their job was to guarantee the safety of their escaping diplomats. British and French subjects were also fleeing in fear of their lives. Even the UN mission was shut down.

Rebel infighting makes almost everywhere unsafe. Assassinations are routine, robbers stalk the roads, while water and electricity supplies are regularly interrupted. (...)

Those of us who visited the rapidly expanding glass-and-steel infrastructure of the commercially minded Libya at the start of the revolution saw hope in the country’s technical class. Highly trained engineers, energy workers, and numerous other professionals all wanted to do business globally, offering the possibility of radical transformation for the good.

Instead, western leaders put faith in unregulated forces carrying a vast arsenal of weapons, including surface-to-air missiles. Many of the warlords have strong links with Islamist terrorist groups operating across the deserts of North Africa.The repressive Gaddafi decades had kept these warring tribes in check through unacceptable levels of brutality. Viable political institutions and a credible security apparatus are now urgently needed, but none of the “liberators” seem interested any more.

Sarkozy is now an alleged criminal himself – he is being actively investigated in France for receiving up to £50m in illegal cash from Gaddafi to fund his 2007 election campaign. Examining judges are said to want to know why the so-called “brother leader” was honored with a state visit to Paris that year, and treated like a personal friend by Sarkozy. Sarkozy denies the charges. France’s current Socialist president, François Hollande, does not even mention Libya, and nor does Barack Obama. The US president was always lukewarm in supporting the intervention in Libya in the first place, making sure that his forces only played a supply role in the military campaign.

Cameron is now similarly lackluster about the growing crisis in a country he was once so proud to visit in person. The barbaric manner in which Gaddafi was killed should surely have provided him, and indeed the entire international community, with a stark warning about what was to follow.

From David Cameron's statement on Libya

[What follows is an excerpt from the Prime Minister's statement on Libya to the House of Commons this afternoon:]

Our relationship with the new Libya must of course deal with a series of problems from the past.

On Megrahi, this is obviously a matter for the Scottish Executive. But I have made my position clear. I believe he should never have been sent back to Libya in the first place.

On WPC Yvonne Fletcher, I want to see justice for her family. There is an ongoing police investigation, and the House will wish to know Prime Minister Jabril has assured me of the new Libyan authority’s intention to co-operate fully. [RB: But not, of course, to extradite anyone for trial in England because that, as the Libyan Justice Minister has pointed out, is contrary to Libyan law.]

Eleventh anniversary of Libyan settlement offer to Lockerbie families

[From CNN’s report Libya offers $2.7 billion Pan Am 103 settlement:]

Libya has offered $2.7 billion to settle claims by the families of those killed in the Pan Am 103 bombing, with payments tied to the lifting of US and UN sanctions, according to lawyers representing some families.

The proposed settlement would work out to $10 million per family, according to a letter from the families' lawyer detailing the offer. It includes relatives of those killed on the ground in the Scottish town of Lockerbie. But compensation would be paid piecemeal, with installments tied to the lifting of sanctions.

The letter says 40 percent of the money would be released when UN sanctions are lifted; another 40 percent when US commercial sanctions are lifted; and the remaining 20 percent when Libya is removed from the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism.

Jim Kreindler, of Kreindler & Kreindler, the firm representing 118 victims' families said the families are "seriously considering" the Libyan offer.

[From the Compensation from Libya section of the Wikipedia

article Pan Am Flight 103:]

On 29 May 2002, Libya offered up to US$2.7 billion to settle claims by the families of the 270 killed in the Lockerbie bombing, representing US$10 million per family. The Libyan offer was that:

• 40% of the money would be released when United Nations sanctions, suspended in 1999, were cancelled;
• another 40% when US trade sanctions were lifted; and
• the final 20% when the US State Department removed Libya from its list of states sponsoring terrorism. (...)

Compensation for the families of the PA103 victims was among the steps set by the UN for lifting its sanctions against Libya. Other requirements included a formal denunciation of terrorism—which Libya said it had already made—and "accepting responsibility for the actions of its officials".

On 15 August 2003, Libya's UN ambassador, Ahmed Own, submitted a letter to the UN Security Council formally accepting "responsibility for the actions of its officials" in relation to the Lockerbie bombing. The Libyan government then proceeded to pay compensation to each family of US$8 million (from which legal fees of about US$2.5 million were deducted) and, as a result, the UN cancelled the sanctions that had been suspended four years earlier, and US trade sanctions were lifted. A further US$2 million would have gone to each family had the US State Department removed Libya from its list of states regarded as supporting international terrorism, but as this did not happen by the deadline set by Libya, the Libyan Central Bank withdrew the remaining US$540 million in April 2005 from the escrow account in Switzerland through which the earlier US$2.16 billion compensation for the victims' families had been paid. The United States announced resumption of full diplomatic relations with Libya after deciding to remove it from its list of countries that support terrorism on 15 May 2006.

On 24 February 2004, Libyan Prime Minister Shukri Ghanem stated in a BBC Radio 4 interview that his country had paid the compensation as the "price for peace" and to secure the lifting of sanctions. Asked if Libya did not accept guilt, he said, "I agree with that." He also said there was no evidence to link Libya with the April 1984 shooting of police officer Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London. Gaddafi later retracted Ghanem's comments, under pressure from Washington and London.

[It is for negotiating this compensation settlement that former Foreign Minister Abdel Ati al-Obeidi and former London ambassador Mohammed Belqasem al-Zwai are awaiting trial in Tripoli for wasting state funds.]

Tony Blair defends Colonel Gaddafi desert meeting

[This is the headline over a report published today on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]

Tony Blair has defended his treatment of Muammar Gaddafi while in office, saying it was "great" the Libyan leader had stopped sponsoring terrorism.

The former PM shook hands with Colonel Gaddafi after talks in Libya in 2004 and re-opened diplomatic links.

On Wednesday a group of countries including the UK, US and France called on the Libyan leader to step down.

Mr Blair said he agreed that change had to be "forced" but added that he had not been "wrong" to restore relations. (...)

In 2004, Mr Blair met Col Gaddafi in the desert near Tripoli for talks following the Libyan leader's renunciation of weapons of mass destruction.

At the same time it was announced that Anglo-Dutch oil firm Shell had signed a deal worth up to £550m for gas exploration rights off the Libyan coast.

But the meeting came after years of strained relations following the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan embassy in London in 1984.

[Prime Minister David] Cameron has criticised Mr Blair's government for conducting "dodgy deals in the desert". [RB: It was during a second desert meeting in 2007 that agreement was reached on a UK-Libya prisoner transfer agreement.]

However, Mr Blair told the BBC: "I don't think we were wrong to make changes in our attitude to Libya when they changed their attitude to us.

"So I think the fact they gave up their chemical and nuclear programme, the fact they stopped sponsoring terrorism and cooperate in the fight against it was great."

Mr Blair, who is now Middle East envoy for "the Quartet", made up of the United Nations, the European Union, Russia and the United States, also said: "But what didn't happen - and people hoped it would but it didn't - was that the external changes in Libyan policy were matched by internal changes.

"And now what you've got over these past few weeks has been totally unacceptable and that's why I think there's no option but to take action and force change there."

PM challenged over Pan Am 103 evidence

[This is the headline over a news item published today on the website of Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm.  It reads as follows:]

The Prime Minister, David Cameron, has been challenged by Professor Robert Black QC to make available any evidence linking deceased Libyan leader Colonel Gadaffi to the Pan Am 103 atrocity, to the Dumfries and Galloway police.

The Prime Minister said yesterday that Gadaffi was responsible for the murder of WPC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984, the destruction of Pan Am 103 in 1988 and the supply of semtex to the IRA.

"First of all we are no strangers to what Gaddafi was capable of. He murdered the police officer on the street of London; he managed to blow up an airliner over the skies of Lockerbie; he gave Semtex to the IRA – Semtex that they’ve probably not even released even to this day. We know what he was capable of," Cameron said.

Professor Black has challenged the Prime Minister's assertion in relation to Pan Am 103, following revelations that the key witness linking convict Abdelbaset Al Megrahi to event was bribed by Scottish police, that the key forensics evidence was claimed to have bene fabricated by former MEBO employee Ulrich Lumpert, and that the evidence surrounding the use of semtex in the destruction of the plane does not bear scientific scrutiny.

"If the Prime Minister has evidence that Colonel Gaddafi blew up Pan Am 103 (or ordered it to be blown up) I hope he has made it available to the Dumfries and Galloway police who, we are told, are still actively investigating Lockerbie," Black said.

The accumulated doubts over the safety of the conviction have led to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission concluding that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. A petition is currently active before the Justice Committee calling for an inquiry into these events.

Lockerbie bomber 'a shell of a man'

[This is the headline over report just issued by The Press Association. It reads as follows:]

The Lockerbie bomber has been tracked down to his villa in the Libyan capital, where he is apparently comatose and near death, it has emerged.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi was found bedridden, surrounded by his family in their grand home in an up-market part of Tripoli. His relatives allowed a reporting team from American news channel CNN to enter the house, which they said had been ransacked by looters who plundered all his medicine.

Oxygen and a fluids drip are all that are keeping him alive, according to his family.

His son Khaled al-Megrahi said he had no idea how much longer his father had to live, but insisted he should be able to spend his last few days in peace at home. "There is no doctor, there is nobody to ask and we don't have a phoneline to call anybody," he told the broadcaster.

His family said he had not been eating and they did not know how to treat him.

CNN reporter Nic Robertson said Megrahi looked far worse than he had done when he last saw him two years ago and described his appearance as "much iller, much sicker, his face is sunken...just a shell of the man he was". He added: "I was shocked when I walked into the room and saw him in such a state."

Megrahi was convicted and imprisoned in Scotland for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103, which killed 270 people. He was granted compassionate release in 2009 on the basis that he was expected to die from prostate cancer within months. But he survived and was residing in Tripoli until the Gaddafi regime fell.

Britain and the new Libyan government were at loggerheads over whether the bomber - and also Yvonne Fletcher's suspected killer - could be removed from the conflict-torn country. Pressure has been growing for Megrahi to be brought back to jail in the UK in the wake of the collapse of Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

The Scottish Government and East Renfrewshire Council issued a joint statement to say there had been contact through Megrahi's family over the weekend.

It said: "Speculation about Al Megrahi in recent days has been unhelpful, unnecessary and indeed ill-informed. As has always been said, Al Megrahi is dying of a terminal disease, and matters regarding his medical condition should really be left there."

[Related reports in The Herald can be read here; in The Scotsman here; in The Guardian here. The report in The Times (behind the paywall) contains the following:]

“He is innocent,” Mohamed al-Alagi [Justice Minister in the Libyan Transitional National Council] told The Times, reflecting a widespread view within Libya. “We will not hand over any Libyan citizen. It was Gaddafi who handed over Libyan citizens,” said Mr al-Alagi, who helped defend al-Megrahi at his trial in the Netherlands.

[The full account of his tracing of Megrahi by CNN's Nic Robertson can be read here.]

IRA supplier named as ‘Lockerbie mastermind’

[This is the headline over a report published (behind the paywall) in today’s edition of The Times. It reads in part:]

A Libyan intelligence officer who helped supply the IRA with explosives in the 1980s is suspected of being the mastermind of the Lockerbie bomb plot.

A TV documentary to be aired this week in the US claims that Nasser Ali Ashour, who was the link between the IRA and the regime of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, led the group responsible for the attack. He is among eight suspects sought by Scottish prosecutors, of whom only three are believed to be alive.

Last week, The Times reported that one, Abu Agila Mas’ud, believed to have manufactured the bomb, was being held in a Libyan prison, accused of unrelated charges. Another, Abdullah al-Senussi, Gaddafi’s brother-in-law, has been sentenced to death in Libya.

The documentary, part of the PBS TV programme Frontline, is the work of Ken Dornstein, whose brother David died when Pan Am flight 103 was blown up over Lockerbie in December 1988.

Ashour’s name has long been known to British intelligence. When a cargo ship, the Eksund, was captured by French customs in 1987, and found to be carrying Semtex explosives and weapons bound for Ireland, its captain named Ashour as the Libyan operative who had supervised the loading of the cargo in Tripoli.

Later he emerged as the senior intelligence officer who supervised the return to Libya of members of the Libyan embassy after the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher in London in 1984.

Mr Dornstein has uncovered evidence that allegedly ties Ashour to the plot. The CIA also had him in their sights. He was interviewed by investigators after the bombing and although he denied any involvement, he was revealed in CIA cables to have travelled to Malta before the bomb was loaded on to a flight that linked to PanAm 103. [RB: But as Dr Morag Kerr has conclusively demonstrated in Adequately Explained by Stupidity?: Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies, the bomb suitcase was already in the Heathrow luggage container AVE4041 before any luggage from the relevant Malta flight could have arrived from Frankfurt.]

Ashour was accompanying the only man convicted of the bombing, Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi.

A letter passed to the CIA by Edwin Bollier, a Swiss businessman who supplied the bomb timer to the Libyans and was a witness at al-Megrahi’s trial, includes Ashour’s telephone number.

Ashour was named in the Lockerbie judgment as head of operations in the Jamahiriya Security Organisation, the Libyan secret service under Colonel Gaddafi. He was said to have bought the timers from Bollier. One was later found at the Lockerbie site.

“Ashour is the most significant person who got away,” said Mr Dornstein.

“He has a history of supplying Semtex explosives. Edwin Bollier in his FBI statement in 1991 said that if he had to name the person who he thought was the prime suspect in the [Lockerbie] bombing, it would be Nasser Ashour.”

Ashour, whose whereabouts are unknown, was also a close colleague of another senior Libyan intelligence officer, Said Rashid, who died of a heart attack before he could be questioned. Rashid’s widow, who spoke to Mr Dornstein, said that she had always suspected that he had been involved in the bomb plot. (...)

A spokesman for the Lord Advocate said: “The Crown Office is aware of this individual. Evidence in relation to him featured at the original trial of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi at Camp Zeist.”

[RB: Ken Dornstein's revelations are not new. They have been circulating since the US State Department distributed in April 1992 its notorious (and now deleted) Briefing Note on Lockerbie. Details can be found on this blog here and here.

A further article by Mr Linklater in the same newspaper is headed One man's mission to find Lockerbie bombers.]