Staying it alone is worse than going it alone
Quote of note:
Perversely, American and British strategic analysts pin their hopes for Iraq on the unpopularity of their own troops. If we leave after elections, goes the thinking, then Iraqi relief and exultation will give the country a chance. It will almost certainly end up controlled by some new strong man, dependent on the reconstituted army, but he will be "our" strong man, and not Saddam Hussein.
Iraq is not Bush's Vietnam. But it is becoming Blair's
Public wrath is growing, and the prime minister can do nothing about it
Max Hastings
Monday November 15, 2004
The Guardian
There is a long-standing British belief that we are more robust about war, and its human cost, than are Americans. Yet compare and contrast current national attitudes to what is happening in Iraq. A reverse image is apparent. The British people are very unhappy. Many Americans think everything is going fine.
Falluja is now in US hands, with very modest losses to the assault forces. In addition to an unknown number of civilian casualties, more than a thousand insurgents are allegedly dead. President Bush has achieved extraordinary success in persuading his people that Iraq is a stadium in which the War Against Terror is being decided. In consequence, there is a widespread American belief that every insurgent killed in Falluja represents one fewer prospective assailant of Washington DC or Sioux City, Iowa.
Bushies are proud of what they perceive as a military success story. Recruitment to the armed forces is booming. The Pentagon highlights the fact that, in the most recent troop rotation to and from the combat zone, 250,000 men and women were seamlessly shuttled between continents, while Iraq's embryo security forces grow daily.
Look at the US department of defence website, a study in exuberant patriotism. Here are some headings: "Operation Military Pride"; "Defend America/ Thank You to The Troops"; "Have A Heart/ Adopt a Soldier"; "Salute America's Heroes"...
The US media trumpets a host of little stories such as this one: "About 50 military veterans in California's San Quentin State Prison joined forces with volunteers from 'Operation Mom' over the weekend, to wrap 430 care packages for service members abroad."
A couple of months ago, a senior British officer in Baghdad said to me: "I have been surprised to perceive the moral strength of the Americans here. Before I came, and remembering Vietnam, I thought that by now they would be cracking. Yet I have not met a single American officer or soldier who questions ... what they are doing".
In short, many Americans, including most of those in the armed forces, think that they are doing a great job in the war zone, and are winning - a sharp contrast with the British mood towards Iraq, which grows ever more fractious and cynical. Every death provokes a spasm of anger, driven by disbelief in the value of the sacrifice.
Tony Blair recognises this. How else to explain his maudlin gesture in attending Ken Bigley's funeral in Liverpool? Public dismay is bipartisan. Retired colonels and home counties matrons, usually counted on to stand foursquare behind our boys on the battlefield, regard what is happening as Bush's private folly. They admire our boys as much as ever, but they are as disgusted by the British national role, harnessed haplessly to Washington's chariot wheels, as any Labour backbencher.
