British High Commissioner to Malaysia, Bruce Cleghorn, denies that the impending war against Iraq is a war against Islam, as alleged by some quarters.

In a recent interview with malaysiakini , Cleghorn assured the Muslim community that his government has never associated the religion or its followers with terrorist or violent acts.

He said the British have acknowledged that any terrorist or violent acts committed to date have been the work of "an unrepresented group of men who do not represent the Muslim community at large".

Separation of responsibility

Saying that the allegation is not true, Cleghorn pointed to the British track record to substantiate his rebuttal.

"We have fought five times in the last 25 years. First it was in Falklands, and the other four occasions - in Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan - were for or o­n behalf of Muslims," he said.

He also said that, within hours of the terrorist attack o­n the US o­n Sept 11, 2000, British Prime Minister Tony Blair ( photo ) had stressed to his people that the act did not represent the (sentiments of the) Muslim community or Islam.

"We have been very clear right from the beginning that it is essential to separate responsibility for terrorist activities from the Muslim community at large," he noted.

"British ministers have said repeatedly that it has nothing to do with Islam and that those (terrorist) acts cannot be used as an excuse to blame the religion for what has happened. The idea of taking action against Iraq has nothing to do with the religion."

'Lack of commitment'

He said it is fact that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has been responsible for the deaths of hundred of thousands of Muslims in Iraq, Iran and Kuwait.

Muslims should also consider the fact that the Baath (Saddam's) political party is a not an Islamic, but secular o­ne.

Cleghorn said it would be possible to avert the war if Saddam were to step down.

"I don't there is much point to speculating about the hypothetical situation but, if Saddam does step down, I think it would go a long way to preventing a war," he said.

He also clarified that the Britain had never sought a war against Iraq and that it was merely concerned with the country's lack of commitment to disarmament as required under Resolution 1441, which was unanimously passed by the UN security council.

"Our objective is to persuade them (the Iraqis) co-operate (to disarm). We have also given them a deadline. The reason why we think that this has to be brought to a conclusion is because Iraq has been given a large period of time to disarm, but has been obstructive and has failed to comply," he said.

On recent progress o­n Iraq's co-operation as reported by UN weapons chief inspector Hans Blix, Cleghorn said this was o­nly in respect of missiles.

"To date, there has been no progress o­n the central issues which are the chemical and biological weapons," he said.

'Old story'

Asked to comment o­n a report in UK newspaper The Guardian , o­n an allegation that Britain had secretly built a chemical plant in Iraq, Cleghorn said this was "a fairly old story".

He said the report was referring to the 'Scott Inquiry', which had investigated a decision by the Conservative government to allow a company "to supply manufacturing plant for dual-use" arms during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1970s.

Cleghorn said the issue had been extensively exposed in various inquiries conducted in the 1990s to look into a series of allegations linking the supply of arms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war.

"But the decision was made during the Iran-Iraq war when relatively little was known about the full scale of what Iraq was doing. It's worth bearing in mind that most of the information o­n Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programme emerged o­nly after 1991," he said.

As a result of the Scott report, the British government has tightened its export control regulations o­n equipment or technology which can be used to manufacture weapons, he added.

Responding to claims that his government had plagiarised a student's material for its report o­n Iraq's involvement in weapons of mass destruction, Clerghorn said the main consideration was that the material used not been disputed to date.

"No o­ne has said that the paper is inaccurate. They simply said that the British government should acknowledge where the material came from. Maybe that's true, maybe there should have been a reference but no o­ne had questioned the content," he added.