A year on from the bombings here in London, whilst Tony Blair lectures the Muslim community on its responsibility to root out extremism, his government continues to take the extremist position of denying any connection between the Iraq war and the increasing terrorist threat to this country. Nevertheless, the facts are clear, as Bradford University security expert Paul Rogers describes:

Even now, and in spite of repeated warnings from many analysts in and out of government service [linking the Iraq war to the 7/7 bombings], the blunt refusal to acknowledge a chain of binding events persists.

(Jihadist propaganda)...strikes a chord with millions of people…..for numerous reasons, but one is that partial truths are embedded in so much of it. The situation in Gaza really is dire; US planes do bomb Afghan villages; the massive use of airpower and artillery in Iraq is causing huge numbers of casualties; rendition, torture, prisoner abuse and tens of thousands of detentions without trial are the order of the day in George W Bush’s global war on terror.

The British government’s insular refusal to register the impact of these events on the radicalisation of many young Muslims contrasts with numerous leaks from security sources and policy specialists within its ranks confirming the reality. An example is the substantial home office/foreign office study, Young Muslims and Extremism, published in April 2004:

“It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment amongst Muslims including young Muslims is a perceived ‘double standard’ in the foreign policy of western governments (and often those of Muslim governments), in particular Britain and the US…

“Perceived western bias in Israel’s favour over the Israel/Palestinian conflict is a key long-term grievance of the international Muslim community which probably influences British Muslims.

“This perception seems to have become more acute post-9/11. The perception is that passive ‘oppression’, as demonstrated in British foreign policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to ‘active oppression’ – the war on terror, and in Iraq and Afghanistan are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam” (see FCO/home office paper published in the Sunday Times, available at
www.times-archive.co.uk/onlinespecials/cabinet2.pdf .)

The first anniversary of the London attacks is rightly a time for reflection and sympathy, but the memories of those killed might be much better served if there was at last some awareness at the top of the British government of the connection between its policies and the costs to its own citizens.

Last year, in response to the bombings I wrote an article entitled Ignoring the Intelligence: How New Labour Helped Bring Terror to London in which I described what the government knew when it launched its war of aggression against Iraq. There I wrote:

“During an interview with the BBC, when it was becoming obvious that banned WMD would never be found in Iraq, Blair said that, ““You can only imagine”:http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/01/iraq-040112-pla-daily01.htm what would have happened if I’d ignored the intelligence and then something terrible had happened”. That Blair’s government had twisted the WMD intelligence deliberately as a pretext for the invasion of Iraq is a matter of record. What should now be focused upon is the intelligence New Labour chose not to distort, but to ignore entirely; the intelligence telling them that the chances of “something terrible” occurring – i.e. a terrorist attack on the UK – would be greatly increased if Britain proceeded to invade Iraq.

Five weeks before the invasion Britain’s intelligence chiefs warned Blair’s government in strong terms that military action would increase the risk of terrorist attacks against Britain by groups such as al-Qaeda. As the UK Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee noted in 2003: “The JIC assessed that al-Qa’eda and associated groups continued to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat to Western interests, and that threat would be heightened by military action against Iraq".

As Britain’s involvement in the occupation of Iraq continued, the government’s advisers continued to warn of the possible consequences. A joint Home Office and Foreign Office dossier, ordered by Tony Blair following the train bombings in Madrid, identified Iraq as a ““recruiting sergeant”“:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1688261,00.html for extremism. The analysis was that the Iraq war was acting as a key cause of young Britons turning to terrorism. It said: “It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment among Muslims, including young Muslims, is a perceived ‘double standard’ in the foreign policy of western governments, in particular Britain and the US. The perception is that passive ‘oppression’, as demonstrated in British foreign policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to ‘active oppression’. The war on terror, and in Iraq and Afghanistan, are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam.”

In 2005, the government was warned yet again. Just weeks before the London bombings, the Joint Terrorist Analysis Centre – including officials from MI5, MI6, GCHQ and the police – explicitly linked the Iraq war with an increased risk of terrorist activity in Britain. The report, leaked to the New York Times, said that “Events in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist-related activity in the UK”.”

Given the advice we know the government has received from its own security experts right across the board, the approach now taken to the question of links between Iraq and last year’s bombings gives us the measure of New Labour as much as any of the sordid episodes that have characterised its time in office. Blair’s frequent posturing as a tolerant liberal who has read the Qur’an and who wishes to reach out to ‘moderate Muslims’ contrasts sharply with his cowardly attempt earlier this week to hold those same ‘moderate Muslims’ responsible for the continuing terrorist threat, knowing full well of his own culpability.

In a way, the government is forced to project this fantasy worldview – with Blair bemoaning British Muslim’s ““false”:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/us/04arrest.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin sense of grievance against the west “: – because to acknowledge reality would be to admit a connection between its own actions and the deaths of 52 UK citizens on 7 July 2005.

Still the plain fact remains that the government is deliberately and repeatedly ignoring the advice of the UK’s intelligence services, departmental advisers and independent experts, and pursuing policies that are increasing the threat of terrorist attacks on Britain. With 52 innocent people dead, many more injured, and the threat of further atrocities hanging over the country, the government continues to strenuously avoid any honest discussion of the problem, preferring to obscure the issues with self-serving mendacity. By uncontroversial reference to the plain facts, New Labour is clearly failing to discharge its basic duty of care towards the population and as such has rendered itself unfit to govern in the most fundamental sense of the term.