Why Gaddafi gave up his WMD

Anne Penketh

109884894 288x300 Why Gaddafi gave up his WMDPortia Walker and Kim Sengupta have shed light in today’s Independent on Britain’s duplicitous relations with Libya over the years, in particular with Colonel Gaddafi’s right-hand man, Moussa Koussa, who defected last March just after the NATO bombing of his country began. Donald Macintyre points out that Koussa, Gaddafi’s security chief who later became foreign minister, was instrumental in working with Britain and the US to fulfil Libya’s promise to renounce weapons of mass destruction.

But there was a single event that prompted Libyan cooperation with Tony Blair and George Bush, and it had nothing to do with Gaddafi’s worries that he might be next on President Bush’s hit-list after Saddam Hussein.

Gaddafi acted after being caught red-handed by British and US intelligence who were monitoring the route of a ship bound for Libya laden with components for centrifuges destined for Libya’s clandestine nuclear programme. There’s a wonderful anecdote in Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins’s book, The Nuclear Jihadist (which is actually about how Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan set up his nuclear supermarket) in which a CIA agent says to Gadhafi, following the interception of the ship: “You are the drowning man, and I am the lifeguard.” Koussa was the intermediary who set up the fateful meeting with Gaddafi in which “he agreed to be saved.”

The CIA agent, Stephen Kappes, was promoted to deputy CIA director  – apparently for his role in securing the Libyan WMD. As deputy director, he was in charge of the administration’s secret extraordinary renditions. According to the Independent, the CIA outsourced some of their brutal interrogations of “high value” prisoners to Libya.

Now, of course, Gaddafi is on NATO’s wanted list and is back in the box marked “rogue”. His usefulness to the West is at an end.

  • Michael A. Miller

    Yes, if I was a dictator with WMD’s I don’t think I’d give them up. What lessons would I have learned from Libya, but more importantly Iraq. Saddam gave up his WMDs only to still be invaded. The thing is, we knew he didn’t have WMDs, because if he had them we wouldn’t have invaded him; the risk would have been far too great. We don’t make war on nations with WMDs, we make war on their capacity to make and use WMDs first.

  • Peter Loud

    The bombing of Libya explains why Iran has every reason to develop its nuclear capability.

    If, in due course, Iran develops nuclear weapons and delivery systems which threaten Britain it is the new Axis of Evil that has made it necessary.

  • Old Git Tom

    A post hoc WMD story already? Evidence? From the secret police? From the CIA that murders, tortures & runs global disinformation & narcotics businesses? That’s all right, then. All liberals can sleep safe in their beds, knowing their fanatical cut-throats are being kept at bay by our criminal cut-throats.    OGT

  • hyperbola2

    The real article on the Independent today that emphasizes the extent to which corporate media in the US and UK have become nothing more than Pravda-like disseminators of state propaganda for the most part is this one:Robert Fisk: For 10 years, we’ve lied to ourselves to avoid asking the one real question

    The second real question we should be asking ourselves is who controls the media and why is it that we have to refer to “samizdat” to get real information. 

  • David Cameron

    If you want to know more about the UK/US being stitched up internationally regarding WMDs, you need to watch this video.

Most viewed



Property search
Browse by area

Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter