THE conclusion by the UK’s Chief of General Staff, Sir Richard Dannatt, that British forces in Iraq are actually part of the problem rather than a solution is a damning contradiction of the stubborn optimism of his political master Tony Blair. The general’s comments are all the more telling because he is a serving officer who has surely placed his career on the line by going public in this way. In the last six months, a procession of American generals has been telling US legislators that the White House assertion that the insurgency is slowly being defeated is plain wrong. These senior American officers, however, have all launched their criticisms from the safety of retirement.
In his interview with Britain’s Daily Mail, Gen. Dannatt asserted that the presence of the UK armed forces “exacerbated” the security problem and therefore they should be withdrawn “sometime soon.” He was scathing about the lack of postwar planning after the US-led Coalition forces had effectively “kicked the door in.” He noted that the original tolerance given the British occupation forces in southern Iraq had turned to outright and menacing intolerance. Dannatt also said: “We are in a Muslim country and Muslims’ views of foreigners in their country are quite clear. As a foreigner, you can be welcomed by being invited in a country, but we weren’t invited, certainly by those in Iraq at the time.” He clearly believes that Afghanistan, where it is widely accepted that NATO troops are on the ground in insufficient numbers, would be a far better deployment of the UK’s limited armed forces.
What Dannatt chose not to address is what would happen to Iraq if the occupation forces withdrew. With the violence — both insurgent and inter-communal — increasing every day, it is clear that George Bush’s trumpeted mission to produce a peaceful, pluralist democracy has failed utterly. Washington is beginning to finger the Iraqi coalition government for the debacle. There can be no doubt that the endless political wranglings, first over the constitution and then the formation of the coalition government created vacuums which the men of violence quickly filled with Iraqi blood.
Clearly, nothing can exculpate Bush for the invasion on wholly false WMD evidence. That is the ultimate source of the current chaos and instability. As many as 665,000 Iraqis may have died since 2003, simply so the president could settle his father’s grudge with Saddam and Washington is seeking an escape from the chaos it is responsible for creating. In response to Dannatt’s highly irregular comments, the Blair government has asserted that the chief of General Staff still enjoys its complete confidence. Can it be therefore that the general was meant to say these things? Could it be that when this officer, well known for his outspokenness, was appointed in August to the most senior job in the British Army, it was fully expected that he would go public with his inevitably stark and critical analysis? If so, then the British are preparing the ground for their own withdrawal. How is Washington planning and justifying similar actions at its end?
