Political office does not mean immunity from prosecution

By Liska Koenig
The Guardsman

A civilian accused of murder is required to answer to a court of law, but apparently this does not apply to high profile politicians like former U.S. president George W. Bush and British ex-prime Minister Tony Blair.

U.S. troops invaded Iraq in March 2003 because Bush claimed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was in possession of enough weapons of mass destruction to wreak havoc in the Middle East and the Western World. Without U.S. intervention, Bush argued, the safety of the post-9/11 world could not be guaranteed.

The threat turned out to be “phantom weapons of mass destruction” — unclear satellite pictures which allegedly showed images of mobile labs to manufacture chemicals used in warfare, followed by accusations of Iraq lying and hiding evidence from inspectors sent by the United Nations Security Council.

While definitely not second in the line of command to the former American president, Blair has been Bush’s right hand man in supporting the cause. His loyalty has been compared to that of a lap dog by the media because he was willing to follow blindly without publicly questioning Bush’s actions.

Blair is currently being investigated by the Chilcot Committee, which was formed by the British government to identify the lesson of what should be learned to help future governments who may be facing similar situations, according to the committee’s Web site.

Up to this day the former British prime minister defends his decision as absolutely necessary to protect his country and world peace. However, earlier witnesses have testified before the committee that Blair told Bush in an April 2002 meeting his country would join the U.S. in a war against Iraq, according to an article by the BBC from Jan. 29.

The former British leader struggles to respond to questions posed by the committee. On the other hand, if Blair, Bush’s follower, has to justify his actions, then why is George W. Bush getting off scot-free? While a formal truth commission to investigate the Bush administration’s anti-terrorism policies was suggested by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in April of 2009, no comparable actions have been conducted by the U.S. government until now.

At least the British government is not afraid to delve into the past. President Obama, however, shies away from that. His election campaign was built on the promise of hope and looking into a brighter future. Before he became president, Obama condemned the war and the lies that led to the invasion of Iraq. Now he is too preoccupied with keeping everybody, including the Republican Party, happy to deal with the current state of the economy and advocating his proposed health care reform.

Other war criminals are tried in front of the International Court of Justice in the Hague, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. George Bush and Tony Blair, however, are former leaders of the world’s most powerful country and its most eager ally. They did not care about the U.N. Security Council’s opinion in 2003 and they don’t care now.

It’s time to wake up and deal with reality. The American people, just like the British people, have a right to know what has lead to this war which has cost taxpayers trillions of dollars and claimed an estimated 105 thousand Iraqi lives, as well as caused at least 4,700 American and 80 British casualties.