It is, today, five years to the day since coalition soldiers, who had the previous day amassed on the border of Kuwait, were given the order to invade Iraq. I recall much being made of it in the media at the time, and now, five years later, the media is once again sharpening its pencils, readying its cameras and straightening its ties (although perhaps with the exception of Jeremy Paxman).
In my opinion, there is no doubt that the war would (and should) have eventually taken place. Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, and was a danger to the Middle East. Nevertheless, I believe the war, in the event, was a complete and utter shambles.
Firstly, let us come to the subject of the Weapons of Mass Destruction. They simply did not exist, so the intelligence must have been flawed - or, perhaps, falsified. Allegations that Tony Blair’s PR adviser Alistair Campbell ’sexed up’ the dossiers on the Iraq war are not at all implausible, considering Campbell’s track record.
The fact that these were provided as an excuse for the invasion is a disgrace in itself: after all, the claims were made by Britain and America, both of whom stockpile weapons which would, most likely, be classified as weapons of mass destruction. It was hypocritical to go to the UN Security Council for a second resolution based on this evidence. True, I would not trust Saddam with weapons of mass destruction; however, now it transpires that these weapons didn’t, and probably never did exist, the matter has become an unhealthy attachment to both Britain and America’s reputation in the international community.
There is also not a shred of evidence to suggest that the coalition is winning in Iraq. Whilst civilian deaths have slowly fallen, sectarian violence is still rife in Iraq, and the country can only be considered to be truly stable when the insurgency is eliminated, and no more sectarian, politically or religiously motivated killing takes place.
However, I believe the insurgency could have been avoided. Indeed, Iraq has, from a foreign policy point of view, been a right royal cock-up. Thousands upon thousands have been killed, and the US alone has spent in excess of $1,000,000,000,000 (~£500,000,000,000, a bill even Bill Gates would struggle with) on the war. It has been very messy, in that the US failed to win over what would later become the insurgency. Chocolate bars don’t win hearts and minds: strong leadership, and protection from danger, is what wins the country over. Some fighting was inevitable, but it has been allowed to run out of control. In a way, the Iraq war is similar to Vietnam: it has met fierce opposition both out in the field and back at home, and was generally very poorly planned out, which is my next point.
The Iraq war was rushed, and took place without a UN resolution or a proper public consultation. It was illegal, badly planned, and the politicians behind it had a somewhat happy-go-lucky attitude to sending troops out there.
When the new government was established, things were also far too rushed. A flawed political system was introduced too early, with elections that were far too soon and far too dangerous. The military has been left to the task of nation building, which should never be the the case. That’s why it’s such a mess that we now have no option but to remain in Iraq, and sort everything out.
In a way, the politicians have locked themselves into this. They’ve made it impossible for us to pull out immediately without allowing Iraq to descend into full-blown, all-out civil war. It’s our mess, so we need to clean it up.
