The myth about the European Union’s opposition to the Iraq war

People seem to forget, or rather want to forget, that most of the European countries supported the war in Iraq. In fact, only France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg and Slovenia vocally opposed it. 17 of the 27 member states backed the invasion, while five countries remained (more or less) neutral.

———————————————-

The evidence

On January 30th , 2003 the so called ‘Ltter of the Eight’ was published in the Wall Street Journal. It was signed by the governments of the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Denmark, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.

The text of the letter in its entirely.

———————————————–

On February 6th, 2003 the ‘Letter of the Eight’ was followed by the ‘Vilnius Letter’. It was signed by the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, and Slovakia. Croatia – all members of the European Union now.

The text of the letter in its entirely.

These two documents alone prove the support for the invasion of Iraq by 14 of the now 27 member states. As mentioned before, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium and Slovenia were against it. What about the other eight countries?

——————————————–

The Netherlands

The Netherlands neither signed the ‘Letter of the Eight’ nor the ‘Vilnius Letter’ , in order to avoid alienating the other Benelux countries. However, the Dutch Prime Minister Balkenende publicly endorsed the invasion of Iraq. On March 20, 2003 he confirmed that the Dutch government politically supports military action against Saddam’s regime:

Excerpt from statement of PM Balkenende, March 20th, 2003:

Peace is a fragile thing. This becomes very clear when one regime persistently pursues the path of threats and terror. The international community must then patiently uphold international agreements and try to eliminate the threat.

Our patience should be very great, but not boundless. For this would jeopardise the foundations on which law and peace are built.

Saddam Hussein presents just such a major threat to peace and the rule of law. Virtually every country in the world accepts this.

(…)

The United Nations first called on Saddam Hussein to disarm twelve years ago. For twelve years the international community has worked patiently and persistently to find a solution. The Security Council adopted seventeen resolutions to secure his cooperation.

Last November, Resolution 1441 gave him a final chance. It demanded his immediate cooperation, otherwise serious consequences would follow. And once again Saddam refused to listen. We have done everything possible to find a solution through the United Nations. But that road came to a dead end this week, after 12 years of joint endeavours.

In recent days many people have highlighted the importance of the international legal order. And rightly so. But defending the legal order also means that those who have persistently and shamelessly broken international law must not be allowed to get away with it.

The Netherlands has therefore given political support to the military action against Saddam Hussein. Freedom and security – including for the people of Iraq – is the highest aim.

——————————————–

The Republic of Ireland

Speaking in the Dáil on May 28th, 2003, in regard to the invasion and the use of Shannon Airport by the US military, the Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern said:

“We are not going to apologise for any small role we may have played in helping to remove a dictator who made his people suffer for 20 years, carried out horrific acts and didn’t care about democracy. He is gone now, and thank God for that.”

——————————————–

Greece

The Greek government did not send troops to Iraq, but however allowed the US military to use Souda Bay,Crete naval base and Greek airports.

——————————————

The politically neutral countries – Austria, Sweden, Finland, Malta and Cyprus

All of these countries are politically neutral. They are not members of NATO and none of them signed the ‘Letter of the Eight’ or the ‘Vilnius Letter’. However, they did not publicly reject the Iraq war (Ireland is actually neutral as well, but still endorsed the invasion).

Austria

Austria tried its best to maintain its neutrality throughout the conflict with Iraq. However on February 14, 2002, the Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schüssel said about Iraq:

“The position of Austria is unchanged. We see the government of Iraq, the leaders of Iraq, as a dangerous group.”

——————————————–

Sweden

Sweden supported Resolution 1441 in the UN Security Council, calling on Saddam to comply. They also offered humanitarian aid in the aftermath of the war, as it was not possible for neutral Sweden to participate in any military action. The country’s neutrality was also the reason why the Swedish government tried to avoid a public break-up with the anti-war countries, such as France and Germany.

——————————————–

Finland

In Finland there was the so called ‘Iraq-gate’. Anneli Jäätteenmäki celebrated a narrow election victory, after accusing former Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen of infringing Finland’s neutrality by giving the impression Finland was part of the coalition against Iraq. She later resigned over these allegations but rejected any wrong doing. The country never publicly opposed the war.

——————————————–

Malta and Cyprus

The countries were members of the so called ‘Movement of the Non-Aligned Countries’ until 2004 and therefore neutral in regard to the Iraq conflict.

———————————————-

The information is available on the internet. You only have to find it. It was while researching for this article that I found no website or blog provides the vital documents and numbers in a coherent way.