[wvns] Tail Between Legs
All the spin in the world can't change the facts on the ground in
Iraq, writes Sukant Chandan
Tail between legs
Sukant Chandan
Al-Ahram Weekly
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2007/862/re71.htm
The British government promoted its occupation of Basra as an exercise
more sophisticated and intelligent than that conducted by its ally the
US in Iraq. From the moment the British hunkered down in Basra after
the March 2003 invasion of Iraq it seemed the British government and
much of the mainstream media never missed a chance to boast of the
softly-softly, hearts and minds approach of its occupation. We were
assured that this had everything to do with the experience it had
gained in previous British military exploits, particularly in Northern
Ireland, while the US was still learning lessons from their historic
defeat in Vietnam.
This projection of the fair-playing Brits was repeated ad naseum until
a string of dramatic events were reported in the world media which put
an end to this mythmaking. Events such as prisoner and detainee abuse
by British soldiers and SAS special forces undercover operations
apparently designed to foment civil strife exposed the British army as
no different from any other hostile military occupier. Everyone
outside the Ministry of Defence and Cabinet agrees that the British
"deployment" from Basra Palace to the airport eleven kilometres out of
the city is an outright sign of defeat.
The British army reassured the world that its experience in Northern
Ireland had equipped it with the necessary lessons to be able to deal
with southern Iraq. However, most people in the nationalist community
in Northern Ireland might say that on this basis the Iraqis could only
look forward to the British army becoming the main cause of their
escalating problems. What the British learnt from Ireland is the
simple lessons of counter-insurgency whereby the national rights of
the people occupied are taken away by brute force. To this day many
Irish are demanding that the British government own up to the many
cases where they have been involved in extra-judicial killings or
colluded in murders by death-squads. If the British experience in
Northern Ireland was a bloody one, then one could have easily
predicted that their experience with the Iraqis would not be much
better, especially if one considers that the Iraqis had already seen a
British occupation in the early part of the twentieth century,
frequent British bombings during the years of UN sanctions, and that
there was a cultural chasm between the British army and an Arab and
largely Muslim people.
It was the events of 19 September 2005 which firmly put to rest any
notion that the British were playing fair with the Iraqi people. Two
SAS men in Arab clothes and head dress were arrested by Iraqi police
at a checkpoint after refusing to stop and opening fire from their
civilian car which was packed with explosives. They were arrested by
Iraqi police and detained which led to British tanks smashing down the
prison wall where the SAS men were being held and releasing them, but
not before incensed Iraqis attacked the British army with petrol bombs
and stones. A British soldier was captured on film fleeing from his
tank in flames from a petrol bomb and being pelted by rocks from the
crowd, an image which symbolises maybe more than any other the British
experience in Basra. The world could see that the British had failed
in Iraq. Anthony Cordesman, a specialist on the Middle East and
military affairs at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies
in Washington, wrote recently that "the British decisively lost the
south -- which produces over 90 per cent of government revenues and 70
per cent of Iraq's proven oil reserves -- more than two years ago."
September 2005 should have been the moment when the British realised
that their attempt to train the Iraqi police force and win the hearts
and minds of the Iraqi people was an unmitigated failure.
Unfortunately for countless Iraqis and the British soldiers, 168
killed so far, many more lives will be lost before Britain finally
leaves Iraq.
In the fog of war, the 19 September events gave an insight into some
of the types of covert operations being carried out by the occupying
forces. But as suddenly as the dramatic events of SAS intrigue in
Basra came to light, the burning questions asked by honest journalists
passed away without any explanations. Sheikh Hassan Al-Zarqani,
Moqtada Al-Sadr's spokesperson at the time, was adamant that the SAS
was planning a "black op" against Iraqi civilians during a religious
event to stoke-up sectarian strife. In light of the incessant civilian
attacks in Iraq which go unclaimed by any resistance group, this is an
area which urgently needs investigation but which hardly any
journalists have looked into.
The notorious prisoner abuse by occupation forces in Iraq was not
uniquely American, as three British soldiers were found guilty of this
in May 2003 at Camp Breadbasket near Basra. There was also the case of
hotel worker Baha Moussa who was beaten to death by British army
personnel in September 2003. This culture of brutality and cover-ups
in the army has been dramatised in the British film Mark of Cain.
British Captain Ken Masters, who was commander of the Royal Military
Police Special Investigations Branch, charged with investigating
allegations of maltreatment of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers,
was found hanged in his room in Basra on 15 October 2005. Masters had
examined almost every single serious allegation of abuse of Iraqi
civilians by British troops including the cases of the fusiliers
convicted of abusing prisoners at Camp Breadbasket and a paratrooper
who had been charged in connection with the death of Moussa. Masters
was also thought to have been involved in the investigation into the
events of 19 September. The British army stated that he was suffering
from stress and could have been suicidal, although colleagues stated
that this suicide of a married father of two who was due to return
home within two weeks came as a shocking surprise.
The British army in Basra, Iraq's second city, was holed up in a small
area in the palace in making troops easy targets for urban guerrilla
warfare. No amount of experience in Northern Ireland could stop the
guerrilla ambushes and the dozens of mortar attacks fired into Basra
Palace daily. Prospects for the British army at the airport appear to
be no better. Although they are not in a tough urban environment as
before, they remain sitting ducks for mortars which have been fired
there as well for some time.
The number of soldiers killed so far in 2007 is nearly double all of
those killed in 2006. Meanwhile, it is no secret that the British have
long considered the Iraqi police in Basra to be nearly completely
infiltrated by militias which are now, according to the Brussels-based
International Crisis Group, "seemingly more powerful and unconstrained
than before."
A Mahdi Army commander detained by the British was released shortly
before the retreat to the airport, seen by many as a deal brokered by
the British with Al-Mahdi Army to allow them a peaceful retreat. While
Sadr and Al-Mahdi Army have called the British retreat a victory
mainly due to their force of arms, there are conflicting reports from
the movement as to their military strategy towards the British at the
airport. Some fighters from the Free Fighters of Al-Sadr state that
they will continue with their armed struggle until their detained
comrades are freed.
The British were no doubt relieved at Sadr's call for cessation of
armed actions for a period up to six months to put his house in order.
One of his spokespersons, Ahmed Al-Shabayni, in an interview on
Al-Jazeera TV was more ambiguous, denying that Al-Mahdi Army is
halting all operations against the occupation forces and stating that
the occupation has no cause to be happy or relieved. Despite the
different signals from Sadr's movement the British army retreated to
the airport without harassment. One can be sure that the conflict
between Al-Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade, whom Al-Mahdi Army accused
the British of working with in their fight with Al-Mahdi Army, will
intensify now that the British are no longer involved on the ground.
The British have known from the outset that the Iraqi police were
saturated by militias hostile to their presence but decided to stay on
in Basra due to their alliance and agreement with US political and
military strategy. Some have speculated that Gordon Brown has decided
to abandon Basra so as to put a distance between himself and Bush.
Most commentators agree that the US is alarmed by this British move,
which leaves them with an untamed southern Iraq right at a time when
Bush is desperately trying to show that the occupation is achieving
some success.
Many see that it is the occupation that is on the run, and not the
resistance. As for Brown's alleged distancing from Bush, the
"redeployment" maybe an indirect bonus for Brown, but in the words of
a recent Financial Times article title, Brown is jumping from the
frying pan that is Basra into the fire that is Afghanistan, where
British and other NATO forces are faring no better against a resurgent
Taliban. Perhaps Britain's most senior and respected military
commander, General Richard Dannatt, has put things most honestly in
arguing that Britain should be preparing for a wider "generational
conflict" in facing "a strident Islamic shadow over the world and a
global conflict of values and ideas".
Britain seems intent on continuing its course of military
confrontation with the Islamic world. Is it any surprise that there
are people from Basra to Helmand who feel that it is only the language
of armed resistance that can enable them to knock any sense into the
British?
*********************************************************************
WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE
To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/
Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
Please consider donating to WVNS today.
Email ummyakoub@yahoo.com for instructions.
To leave this list, send an email to:
wvns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:wvns-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:wvns-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
wvns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
No comments:
Post a Comment