WikiLeaks: UK government feared Libyan reprisal if Lockerbie bomber died in jail
The British government feared that Libya would take "harsh and immediate action" against its interests if the Lockerbie bomber died in prison, according to leaked US diplomatic cables.
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi made "thuggish" threats to halt all trade deals with the UK and harass embassy staff if Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was not freed.
Tripoli also offered a "parade of treats" to the Scottish devolved administration if it let the convicted mass killer go - although the incentives were refused.
Details of the fraught contacts between Libya and Britain over al-Megrahi are revealed in documents obtained by controversial website WikiLeaks and seen by the Guardian newspaper.
The American charge d'affaires in London, Richard LeBaron, wrote in a cable to his bosses in October 2008: "The Libyans have told HMG [Her Majesty's Government] flat out that there will be 'enormous repercussions' for the UK-Libya bilateral relationship if Megrahi's early release is not handled properly."
The cable said the US embassy had been given this information by two British officials - Downing Street's North Africa adviser Ben Lyons, and Rob Dixon, his counterpart at the British Foreign Office.
The Scottish government eventually released al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds in August last year because he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer.
However, the move caused fury in the US amid suggestions that it was linked to lucrative British oil deals with Libya.
Al-Megrahi received a hero's welcome on his return to the country and is still alive more than a year later.
Since becoming British prime minister, David Cameron has condemned the decision to free al-Megrahi as "completely wrong".
In January 2009, the US ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, confirmed in a cable that "dire" reprisals had been threatened against the UK and London was braced to take "dramatic" steps for self-protection.
The Libyans "convinced UK embassy officers that the consequences if Megrahi were to die in prison... would be harsh, immediate and not easily remedied... specific threats have included the immediate cessation of all UK commercial activity in Libya, a diminishment or severing of political ties and demonstrations against official UK facilities".
Mr Cretz went on: "(Libyan) officials also implied, but did not directly state, that the welfare of UK diplomats and citizens in Libya would be at risk."
The British ambassador in Tripoli, Vincent Fean, "expressed relief" when al-Megrahi was released, the US reported.
"He noted that a refusal of Megrahi's request could have had disastrous implications for British interests in Libya. 'They could have cut us off at the knees,' Fean bluntly said."
Mr Cretz cabled that "the regime remains essentially thuggish in its approach".
He warned that the US itself should not intervene, saying: "If the (US government) publicly opposes al-Megrahi's release or is perceived to be complicit in a decision to keep al-Megrahi in prison, (America's Libyan diplomatic) post judges that US interests could face similar consequences."
Another cable stated that the then british justice secretary Jack Straw, had indicated al-Megrahi could live for five years.
"Megrahi could have as long as five years to live but the average life expectancy of someone of his age with his condition is 18 months to two years," the document said.
"Doctors are not sure where he is on the timescale. The Libyans have not yet made a formal application for compassionate release ... but HMG believes that the Scottish may be inclined to grant the request, when it comes, based on conversations between ... (SNP first minister) Alex Salmond and UK justice secretary Jack Straw.
"Although the general practice is to grant compassionate release within three months of end of life, this is not codified in the law, so the release, if granted, could occur sooner."
There were also suggestions that the UK government had manipulated the rival SNP administration into freeing al-Megrahi against their own interests.
After the release, the US ambassador wrote that the Scots had got out of their depth, saying: "The Scottish government severely underestimated both US government and UK public reaction to its decision ... Alex Salmond has privately indicated that he was 'shocked'."
Mr Salmond had told the US consul in Edinburgh on August 21 last year that "he and his government had played straight with both the US and the UK government, but implied the UK had not ... he said the Libyan government had offered the Scottish government a parade of treats, 'all of which were turned down'."
Three days later Robin Naysmith, who served as the SNP's representative in Washington, said Mr Salmond was shocked by the US outcry.
Mr Salmond's spokesman said the leaks were "diplomatic tittle tattle", but "vindicated" the Scottish government's position.
He said: "We were clearly the only ones playing with a straight bat and interested in applying the precepts of Scottish justice, which we continue to do and continue to uphold.
"The cables confirm what we always said - that our only interest was taking a justice decision based on Scots law without fear or favour, which was exactly what was done, and that our public position was identical to our private one.
"They also show that the former UK government were playing false on the issue, with a different public position from their private one - which must be deeply embarrassing for the Labour Party in Scotland - and that the US government was fully aware of the pressure being applied to the UK government."
