Gamal Nkrumah reproves the brouhaha in Washington with regards to the release of Abdel-Basset Al-Megrahi This is a question of much ado about nothing. Why should the world today be preoccupied by the release from a Scottish prison of a Libyan national convicted of downing an American airliner three decades ago? Frankly speaking, friends and foes of the United States are not obliged to yield to pressure from Washington, and especially not over issues essentially meant for domestic American political consumption. This week marks the first anniversary of the release from Scotland's Greenock Prison of Abdel-Basset Ali Mohamed Al-Megrahi, the onetime Libyan intelligence chief, on compassionate grounds because he is suffering from advanced prostate cancer. At the time, medical practitioners gave Al-Megrahi a "reasonable estimate" of three years to live. To date, Al-Megrahi is alive and US authorities believe that the Scots duped them. A group of US lawmakers this week insisted on a separate inquiry into the affair by the US Senate. They spoke in not so hushed tones of a "cloud of suspicion". US Senator Robert Menendez ominously warned of "outstanding questions" unanswered by Britain and insisted that the Scottish authorities, in particular, be summoned for questioning in Washington. Scottish ministers and officials promptly declined the request to attend a US Senate hearing, including Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill, Scottish Prison Service Medical Chief Andrew Fraser, and British Petroleum executive Tony Hayward. Washington believes that Al-Megrahi was released in an oil deal involving BP, a company currently embroiled in an oil spill polluting the Gulf of Mexico and causing an environmental catastrophe in several southern US states. "As we have expressed repeatedly to Scottish authorities, we maintain that Al-Megrahi should serve out the entirety of his sentence in a prison in Scotland. We have and will continue to reiterate this position to the Scottish and Libyan authorities," US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated categorically this week. "What is quite clear is that the people of Scotland think the decision should be made here in Scotland," MacAskill countered. He stressed that the decision to release Al-Megrahi was for the Scottish justice minister and that the people of Scotland "do believe [that the decision] was made in good faith without any intervention, or indeed any consideration, of political, diplomatic or economic considerations." Al-Megrahi was sentenced to life imprisonment for his alleged role in the 21 December 1988 bombing of PanAm Flight 103 over the Scottish village of Lockerbie. Some day Al-Megrahi's trial was calibrated to fix the result. Unsurprisingly, the Americans have hit back hard against the Scottish and Libyan authorities, as well as against BP. The turn of events has exposed Washington's modus operandi, in particular as far as foreign policy is concerned. For too long Washington -- executive, legislature and judiciary -- has operated as an exclusive club, half-heartedly consulting only a handful of close allies. Even then, Washington's allies' views are rarely taken into account, and consultation is a mere formality. Both Scotland and Libya have refused to pander to Washington. The Scottish parliament has already convened two inquiries into Al-Megrahi's release. So it is something of an affront to Scotland and Libya that Washington deems it necessary to hold an official investigation of its own into the Al-Megrahi affair. Washington has no jurisdiction under international law concerning an inquiry into Al-Megrahi's release on compassionate grounds. Indeed, as Britain's Lord Mandelson described in 2009, the suggestion that British-Libyan trade deals led to the release are "offensive" and "implausible". Such suggestions and the ensuing brouhaha are preposterous. Moreover, the US is hardly in a position to lecture others on injustice and impunity. Where was US justice when in July 1988 the captain of a US naval warship, the SS Vincennes, was exonerated in spite of gunning down Iran Air Flight 655 killing some 300 people aboard, including 70 children? The US prefers allies that loyally cling to it and that have no mind of their own. Is it really a pertinent question of international politics that Al-Megrahi should hurry up and die for Washington to be at peace? What is the real nature of the US's dubious moral high ground concerning the Megrahi case? Earlier this year, in February, the Scottish parliament's Justice Committee inquiry into the case concluded that MacAskill's visit to Greenock Prison to see Al-Megrahi before his release was "inappropriate". However the Scottish government retorted that MacAskill followed "due process". The charge that BP lobbied for Al-Megrahi's release was also summarily dismissed. Whatever the truth of the matter, the world, including European powers, are remonstrating for increasing trade relations with Libya, one of the most lucrative markets in North Africa. Libya has expanded domestic demand and worked hard to attract foreign investment in sectors of the economy other than oil. Libya's efforts at diversification of its economy have yielded few results, but the country is working hard to achieve its goals. Thriving Libya is ever more open for business. Over the past three years, foreign direct investment has tripled. Libya has kept its market open throughout the financial crisis. The Libyan economy has been steaming ahead since Washington no longer viewed Tripoli as a pariah state. As American legislators intensify the fight to bring to book those deemed responsible for letting Al-Megrahi off the hook, so to speak, a battle is raging on the other side of the Atlantic with even greater implications for national sovereignty and the right to challenge the might of the Pax Americana.
