Iraq - A Brutal War, Whatever The Label
"THIS
IS far graver than Vietnam. If we leave and there's no civil war, that's
a victory." William Odon, former head of the US national security
agency, is more in touch with the reality of Iraq than George Bush and
Tony Blair.
Blair is seeking to 're-label' the war in order to
sell the idea of further involvement of British troops and resources in
Iraq. The 'first conflict' to remove Saddam Hussein is now won, he said,
but a 'new conflict' against 'global terrorism' is now unfolding in
Iraq, the new crucible of international terrorism.
Yet terrorism did not really exist there before the
invasion. Moreover, what we see in Iraq is not simply terrorism but a
nationalist resistance against occupying forces. Blair has, in effect,
declared a new war without any debate in parliament or in the cabinet.
His absurd claims were made at the end of one of the
most bloody weeks in Iraq. Three hundred were killed last week,
including three Kurdish and a US hostage barbarically beheaded on
television. Over 10,000 civilians and more than 1,000 occupation troops
have died so far.
Blair's promise of a new period of carnage and
mayhem is against the background of an almost universal condemnation of
the 'first conflict' - and scorn for him and those who supported the
war.
A YouGov poll last weekend showed that support for
the war is at its lowest, with just 38% now believing it was justified,
while 52% think it was wrong. This compares to 66% who supported the war
and 29% who opposed it when US and British forces invaded in April 2003.
According to a Guardian/ICM poll, 71% want to see the troops withdrawn.
Elections
OPPOSITION HAS grown as each revelation shatters the
false prospectus on which the war was fought. Leaked reports show that
Blair was warned by foreign secretary, Jack Straw, and British diplomats
of the catastrophic consequences of the aftermath of any invasion to
topple Saddam.
Even a 'hero' of the conflict, British officer, Tim
Collins, whose picture is said to hang in the Oval office of the US
president, declared that the war was either an example of "gross
incompetence" or was "simply a cynical war". Straw,
without a trace of irony, has highlighted one achievement: the setting
up of football leagues in Iraq!
No part of Iraq is 'safe' for British, US or other
occupying troops. Even in the heavily patrolled 'green zone', coalition
forces have been advised to walk around in pairs.
Kofi Annan, UN general secretary, bluntly stated
that the original invasion was 'illegal'. Elections, if they go ahead in
January, would not be considered 'legitimate'. The US and Britain have
quite clearly decided to pursue a policy of 'Vietnamisation', handing
political power to stooges while attempting to construct a viable Iraqi
state machine.
If elections go ahead in January, they will be like
those being undertaken in Afghanistan, where whole swathes of the
country will not participate. Fallujah, Ramadi, Sadr City in Baghdad,
and many other areas are controlled by the Iraqi opposition.
It now seems that the US will attempt to complete
what it failed to do in April: the military occupation of Fallujah to
'root out' Sunni 'terrorists'. It is no more likely to succeed, even if
the US manages to occupy the city - with hundreds and possibly thousands
of victims the result. A guerrilla-type resistance will follow from this
which, if it is joined by Shias in Sadr City, for instance, will
completely tie down the 140,000 US troops presently in Iraq.
Quagmire
RATHER THAN supporting a 'new conflict', with
unforeseen consequences, some capitalist commentators, in the Financial
Times for instance, have urged Bush and Blair to rapidly withdraw their
forces from Iraq. The Socialist Party supports the withdrawal of the
troops. But as we have pointed out many times and, as the lessons of
Vietnam underlined, it is easy for imperialism to go in but much more
difficult to get out of a 'quagmire'.
On a capitalist basis, one consequence of a rapid
withdrawal could be a bloody ethnic or religious conflict which will put
into the shade the horrors which Iraq has witnessed since the US
invasion.
The elites of Iraq, whether Shia, Sunni, Kurdish,
Turkomen, etc, will seek to enhance their own position, setting one
ethnic or religious group against another in order to secure power,
income and prestige.
The beheading of the Kurdish hostages is just a
small indication of the horrors which could be visited on the people of
Iraq on the basis of the maintenance of landlordism and capitalism, and
the ethnic and religious divisions that go with it.
This is why a democratic and equitable solution to
the problems of the country is only possible with the working class in
the lead, uniting all groupings on the basis of a socialist and
democratic programme.
|