IRA2
Lib Dems seek answers over Spicer contract
Tom Griffin
4 February 2005
Irish World
The US Government is facing renewed pressure this week over a $293 million Iraq security contract awarded to mercenary Tim Spicer. Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Teather has called on the US to respond to concerns raised by the family of Belfast man Peter McBride, who was shot dead by Scots Guards soldiers under Spicer’s command in 1992. The call came as Spicer pulled out of a planned lecture at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London last week, because ofthreatened protests by students.
Teather has written to the US Embassy in London to ask that the Pentagon reply to a submission by Derry-based human rights group the Pat Finucane Centre on behalf of the McBride family.
“There are serious issues here. The Americans should at least have the courtesy to reply to the McBride family,” she told the Irish World last week.
“There are also issues around violations of international law,” the MP added, in a reference to the Arms to Africa Affair, when Spicer’s former company, Sandline International, supplied arms to Sierra Leone in breach of a UN embargo with the tacit approval of Foreign Office officials.
Teather first became involved in the McBride case in 2003, when Kelly McBride stood in the Brent East by-election to highlight the British Army’s retention of her brother’s killers. Teather defeated Labour’s Robert Evans to take the North-West London seat, which has the largest Irish community of any British constituency, and pledged to raise the McBride case at Westminster.
Spicer’s role in the case and his chequered mercenary career have fuelled worldwide controversy since the US Army announced last June that it was awarding his company, Aegis Defence Services, the contract to co-ordinate the work of private security contractors in Iraq.
“As Commanding Officer of the Scots Guards he told a pack of lies about Peter’s murder and dragged his name through the dirt,” Peter McBride’s mother Jean said when she learned of the deal. “God knows what his own private army will do in Iraq.”
A campaign against the Aegis contract launched by Irish-American lobby group, the Irish National Caucus, has earned significant support in Washington. Senators including Ted Kennedy, Hilary Clinton and John Kerry wrote to Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld last August calling for an investigation.
In a reply to the Senators last November, the director of the US Army Contracting Agency Sandra Sieber, defended Spicer’s role in supporting McBride’s killers, Scots Guardsmen Mark Fisher and James Wright, who each served three years of a life sentence for murder before being released and returned to active duty, serving with their regiment in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
“It is significant that the British Ministry of Defence was apprised of our intention to award the contract to Aegis, and did not object to or advise against the action,” Ms Sieber said.
“The contracting officer was not aware of the allegations subsequently lodged against Mr Spicer in the press at the time of the contract award. However, our post-award review of the facts surrounding these matters did not establish that Mr Spicer’s advocacy on behalf of his former soldiers had any bearing on his or Aegis’s record of integrity or business ethics. I understand that others besides Mr Spicer, including members of the British Government, also advocated for the soldiers’ release from prison. The British Government reviewed the case and found in favour of the soldiers release. Recently, a British Army review board reinstated the soldiers into the British Army.”
The Pat Finucane Centre responded in December with a submission on behalf of the McBride family, which described the Pentagon’s conclusions as “factually inaccurate and flawed on a number of levels.”
“The allegation against Mr Spicer is not that he advocated for the soldiers’ release from prison. The issue is that he opposed their arrest and opposed their being charged with any offence whatsover. In a sworn affidavit and again in his autobiography Spicer has sought to portray an entirely fictitious and untruthful version of the events
preceding, during and following the actual murder. It is essential to point out that the version of events as described by Spicer, which constituted the defence offered by the soldiers, has been rejected by the courts and described as a ‘concoction of lies’ by the trial judge. The original judgement has been upheld in subsequent appeals.” Sarah Teather also criticised the American response last week and called on the US to address the issues raised in the Pat Finucance Centre’s submission. “Their defence is indefensible,” she said. They have actually got some of the details wrong. The British Army have not reinstated the two soldiers. They were actually never suspended, completely contrary to Queen’s regulations. ”
The British Government has distanced itself from Spicer’s venture in Iraq. In a statement in July, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Britain was not a party to the contract, and had no involvement in its negotiation. However, the Aegis deal has been widely seen as a sop to British dissatisfaction with the distribution of commercial opportunities in Iraq.
Evidence of continuing links between Spicer and the British Government has emerged in the wake of last March’s failed coup plot in Equatorial Guinea, which was led by Spicer’s former Sandline colleague, Simon Mann.
Spicer reportedly told the Sunday Times that he was the person referred to by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw when he admitted in December that the British Government had advance information about the impending coup attempt, which the Foreign Office had discussed with “an individual formerly connected with a British private
military company.”
“The individual concerned claimed no knowledge of the plans,” Straw told the House of Commons in a statement.
Straw said the Foreign Office was opposed to the coup attempt. However, the revelation, following initial denials, that officials knew about the plot has fuelled allegations of British involvement.
