Just finished having my intelligence insulted by Simon Jenkins, again. So I'm going to fisk the segments of his latest article that I find most morally and intellectually bankrupt.
Total confusion now surrounds command and control of British troops in Iraq after “sovereignty transfer” in July. We hear that they will depart if asked to go by the new Iraqi authority, but that the Iraqi authority is being relied upon not to ask them to go. Therefore 3,000 extra troops are on their way, apparently to Najaf of all places, but they are no more than an expensive facelick from Mr Blair to Mr Bush. It is not expectation of success but fear of undignified retreat that keeps coalition troops in Iraq, nothing else.
Evidence?
The Anglo-American will to sustain surely this last great imperial adventure is waning. As in Fallujah and Kurdistan, so in the rest of Iraq the guns of militiamen and the cries of mullahs outrank Western fantasies about implanting liberal democracy on Muslim soil. Militant Islam has proved a sturdier foe than militant communism. Bin Laden will have more laughs before he is done. Only then might we be able to stop bombing Muslims and concentrate on bringing this man to some sort of justice.
Erm.. What the hell? Does Mr Jenkins have the slightest idea what's going on in Kurdistan? The media silence is particularly good evidence of what's going on: nothing bad. No armed uprisings, no demonstrations no angry Kurds running down coalition troops, just a lot of people rebuilding their country and getting on their way to a peaceful and democratic future. My friend Ranj, hasn't been seen in University for a while and I'm not surprised, he apparently had a great time in Iraq with his kurdish family - if I were in his position I'd probably not return to Uni myself.
What's more the handing over of Fallujah to a former army officer is not some buck passing exercise, nor is it indicative of a lack of interest but is instead shrewdness on a quite impressive scale, which is paying off royally.
What's with this belief that our leaders somehow feel their mission is doomed? Mr Jenkins would do well to note that not everyone is as ridiculously pessimistic as him and that he should not imply without evidence his absurdly bleak outlook onto every step taken by the coalition. He seems to have soured significantly since he belittled the terror threat to Europe a week before the Madrid Bombings.
All I seem to be getting from his writing is that everything that the prime minister and president Bush have been saying about their intention to stay the course in Iraq is a lie because Simon Jenkins says so.
For two years since 9/11, the ramifications of America’s response have been daily headline news. It is the longest-running story of my lifetime. Yet it is inconceivable that America and Europe will keep their armies on the land mass of Asia for ever, whatever excuse they may concoct. They cannot tax their citizens and pollute their civil liberties indefinitely. Western democracy is too shrill for that. One day it will bring the militarism and scare mongering to account.
How many times does Al Qaeda need to tell us that they want us all dead? I'm not even dealing with this bluntly: they want to kill all the Jews, homosexuals, Americans and infidels in general. They have reiterated their aims again and again and again. Scare mongering!? The media couldn't even bring itself to show Nick Berg having his head sawed off more than once on the cover of papers, and lord knows we haven't seen anything more than him being tied up on TV.
Mr Jenkins' cry of "We have nothing to fear except fear itself" was foolish when he issued it to anyone who remembered the terrorist attacks on September 11th, was ridiculed less than a week later when 190 spaniards were killed in a terrorist bombing in Madrid and now, when Al Qaeda has masterminded attacks on Iraqi, Turkish and Jordanian soil in the last 3 months and decapitated a civilian on film it is unimaginably idiotic.
The victors of the Cold War are enduring the most appalling hang-over. Having discovered the glory of military power, they are now discovering its limits. They can smash nations but not rebuild them. They are Terminators not construction workers. The actual rebuilders of the new Iraq are cooling their heels round the pool in Baghdad’s green zone, unable to work and desperate to go home. Hardly a cent of the billions allocated to “the new Iraq” is visible on the ground. It has been siphoned off into banks in New York and Amman. Little of it will ever see the light of day.
I direct your attention here, here and here. In addition I think it's laughable to assume that this money won't "see the light of day" because of some sort of incompetence on the part of the coalition when as much as $10 Billion was embezzled in the UN Oil-For-Food scam.
For pities sake Libby Purves, writing just a day or two before in the same paper devoted an entire column to the accomplishments made in setting up the new Iraqi Navy (Iraq hasn't had a navy since it was destroyed by Saddam's reckless wars).
If Mr Blair means a word of what he says about confronting global evil and rescuing victims of tyranny, what is he doing about Sudan? Its million refugees today are ten times more afflicted than were Iraq’s in 2003. Where are the Royal Marines in Sudan? Where are Jack Straw’s fine words in Sudan? Where is Mr Blair’s jetset diplomacy in Sudan?
The answer is nowhere. That is the trouble with neocon imperialism. It cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. Its morality seems partial and spasmodic. It is not empire-lite but empire-hypocritical.
Good question Mr Jenkins. I'm wondering that too, oh wait, I thought we'd established beyond a doubt that 'unilateral intervention' without approval by the UN doesn't work, nor would it be accepted.
The truth is that the world is moving on the Sudan issue through the UN and all should well remember just exactly how fast the UN moves to combat the heinous crime of genocide - with the same lightning reflexes it demonstrated in Rowanda, Bosnia and Iraq.
Iraq has proven only one thing and that is that the west can never get away with what it has attempted here. Not because it is wrong, or unjust or impossible, as Jenkins would assert but because the political and media backlash is so intense that it would be political suicide to attempt such action, irrespective of how right it might be.
Neo-conservatism hasn't failed - a free and democratic Iraq will likely bare testament to that, however its enemies have proved far more potent than previously assumed. It was a one shot rifle and we've used up its only round.
I can say to the black Sudanese that there will be no international intervention. If there is any, it will come to late and be as half-assed as the UN's actions in Bosnia and Rowanda. As to whether that was Mr Blair's fault, I can reply with a resounding no. You cannot berate a man for jumping to deal with one pressing humanitarian, security issue, riddle him with political bullets for doing so in a manner you deemed unacceptable and then expect him to jump once more - he's playing it 'by the book', on this one and it will be the people of Sudan who will suffer.
Later
John
Posted by John Swaine at May 19, 2004 11:12 PM