Assessing America's 'imperial adventure' in Iraq
By John Simpson
BBC World Affairs Editor, Baghdad
US troops have been packing up as their combat operation in Iraq officially ends "This," a leading American supporter of President George W Bush wrote in a British newspaper back in February 2003, just before the invasion of Iraq, "is our imperial moment".
He went on to argue that the British had no right to criticise America for doing what they themselves had done so enthusiastically a century before.
But America's imperial moment did not last long. And now, seven years later, the US is criticised for just about everything that happens here.
Opinion is evenly divided between those who are glad to see the Americans go, and those who criticise them for leaving too soon and potentially laying Iraq open to fresh sectarian violence.
Bittersweet memories for Iraqis
Shrunken superpower
It is a pattern that every occupying power becomes used to. America, it seems, cannot do anything right - not even getting out.
Most of the arguments in favour of invading back in 2003 have come to nothing.
Many Iraqis welcomed the overthrow of Saddam Hussein - 50% regarded the invasion as a liberation, according to a BBC poll taken in 2004, while 50% regarded it as an occupation - but nowadays it is hard to find anyone who sees America as Iraq's friend and mentor.
Nor has the overthrow of Saddam Hussein led to a general domino effect towards democracy throughout the Middle East.
On the contrary, America's position in the Middle East has been visibly eroded.
Some of the things done by the American authorities in Iraq, based in the Green Zone in Baghdad, were sober, positive and practical.
Some have become a burden, for instance the cons ution the Americans wished on Iraq, which makes it fiendishly hard to create a decent effective government.
Grotesque mismanagement
And because the Green Zone administration was thrown together in a huge hurry back in 2002-03, overseen by former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld - a man with no interest in nation-building - some of what was done involved grotesque levels of corruption and mismanagement.
The toppling of Saddam Hussein failed to trigger any domino effect in the Middle East Mr Rumsfeld was sent a careful, conscientious 900-page report by the state department containing detailed plans for the post-invasion period. He reportedly dumped it, unopened, straight into his waste-paper basket.
Iraqis, and some Americans, pile a good deal of the blame for what happened during this period on to Mr Rumsfeld's ally Paul Bremer, the temperamental pro-consul who often seemed unaware of what was going on right under his nose.
Former Vice-President Cheney, when asked by the Saudi foreign minister why the US insisted on going ahead with the invasion, answered: "Because it's do-able."
But the problem began even higher up.
A respected Iraqi dissident, who later became vice-president, has described how shocked he was to find, a few weeks before the invasion, that President Bush seemed wholly unaware that Muslims in Iraq were divided between Shia and Sunni Islam.
American generals seemed to despair of finding a solution to the growing insurgency.
Petraeus's luck
The US forces, contrary to all the basic rules of counter-insurgency, allowed the enemy to attack "Route Irish", the main road between Baghdad airport and the Green Zone, as and when it chose.
British soldiers, used to Northern Ireland, pointed out again and again that occasional nervous sorties in armoured vehicles were not the same as taking control of it.
Their American counterparts took no notice, and the situation grew worse.
It took an expert in counter-terrorism, Gen David Petraeus, to turn the situation around. Like most successful generals, he had luck on his side.
Gen Petraeus understood that insurgencies have a specific life-span, and he was fortunate enough to arrive in Baghdad at the time when the Iraqi insurgency was starting to wind down.
Sunni Muslims were increasingly sick of the violence that Sunni extremists were causing, and he encouraged the growth of Awakening Councils which enabled moderate Sunnis to rise up and deal with both Baathists and supporters of al-Qaeda.
The supply of people willing to become suicide bombers began to dwindle.
Gen Petraeus's tactics turned the tide. At the height of the violence something like 100 people were dying each day across the country from bombings and shootings.
Now the number killed in political violence has dropped to about 10 a day - unacceptable in a more peaceable society, but a great relief here.
Uncertain future
Yet many Iraqis fear that with the Americans no longer here in force, and the Iraqi army and police still lacking sufficient training, the violent extremists on both the Sunni and the Shia sides could start fighting again.
That is the usual fate of an occupying force.
Vast numbers of people have died, the overwhelming majority of them Iraqi.
Unthinkably large amounts of money have been spent here, and yet Iraq has slipped far down the world's rich list.
Has the United States benefited? It is hard to see how.
As the British learned in the Boer War, and Russia learned by invading Afghanistan, great military powers run big risks by putting their strength to the test against weak-seeming opponents.
America seems to have shrunk as a direct result of its imperial adventure in Iraq.
It will have to work very hard to persuade the rest of the world that it is strong again.
The Iraq war is going to turn out to be worst American up in history.
the worst up was lying their way into it.
no, that was the administration's worst up. I'm talking as far as repercussions for the US go.
americans already expect the worst. that stigma has already worn off.
let the past go..... why are you dwelling on george bush?
I'm not talking about public opinion either. Stigma has nothing to do with it. There are very real repercussions coming America's way, some of which you're feeling right now. Iraq isn't going to become the shinning beacon of democracy in the middle east that Bush's administration promised. I honestly can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to ever believe it would be.
Iraq is already a tumor but it'll become the cancer its promising to be, not just for America, but for all western culture. I don't have a clue how you're supposed to deal with that though.
in the end, americans only give a about themselves.
if you lost a son or daughter, then i agree. if not, americans are shallow....and don't give a . this is the at ude that got them here.There are very real repercussions coming America's way, some of which you're feeling right now.
no . i'm from ireland. i knew they were lying when they presented their case to the UN.Iraq isn't going to become the shinning beacon of democracy in the middle east that Bush's administration promised. I honestly can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to ever believe it would be.
they'll walk around, with chest puffed, shouting about how great they are.Iraq is already a tumor but it'll become the cancer its promising to be, not just for America, but for all western culture. I don't have a clue how you're supposed to deal with that though.
believe me, they don't give a .
I disagree, I think they give quite a bit of . Not much they can do about it though, can they? Other than holding the Bush administration responsible.
haven't you heard? bush is living well, for 2 years now, in dallas.
its almost as if he never existed.
Angry white people making loud noises
"Not much they can do about it though, can they"
citizens can't do about anything. The country doesn't belong to them anymore.
it never did
its close to being the worst up, but theres no topping the Civil War and Vietnam...
Civil war? civil war had to happen.
Vietnam or Iraq didn't
White people get angry about a lot of stuff, but I don't think those white people were angry due to some conspiracy theory suggesting Bush was born in Kenya or a secret Muslim. If I recall correctly, it was because he invaded 2 countries during his first term as President AFTER his administration displayed total incompetance when it came to preventing the 9/11 attacks on which he and his administration founded those 2 wars on. Ya, I know, hard to believe that this country was stupid enough to actually believe anything Bush said - but a lot of people have died for nothing.Angry white people making loud noises
not really, and even if it did, not to the extent of which it did. imo - time, competant leadership and diplomacy could have achieved everything that the civil war did and more.
you mean the way it's working in the middle east?
when both sides have $ to lose, that don't work
i was talking about the civil war.
the only way to deal in the middle east is to not get involved, throw some cash at it and let them fight it out amongst themselves.
Hyperbole...it's not even the worst f* up to date.
Vietnam saw several thousand more casualties, similar political impact (degraded rep as world leader), and worst of all...they came home with no resolution whatsoever. At least in the case of Iraq, we can say that we ousted an oppressive leader/regime and attempted to promote a democratic government in its place.
I'm not sure it's hyperbole. I really can't think of an action of this scale the US purposely undertook that was more wrong. Given that there isn't really a government in Iraq seven years after the invasion, I can't say there is a resolution there.
We were going to win the war against communists by going to Vietnam? And nothing had changed by the time we left, after sacrificing 10 times as many American soldiers.
About Iraq's lack of a government able to protect its people...you're preaching to the choir, which is why I don't think we should've left. But at least this government offers the possibility for freedoms that its people would not have otherwise enjoyed if Sadam were still in power.
And the original statement WAS hyperbole because he said it's going to turn out to be the worst f* up in American history...but there's a lot of history left to be made. And if/when America crumbles, I'm pretty sure whatever led to that occuring will be seen as the worst f* up...not some decision to go into Iraq.
it was gonna happen anyway, when we stop paying them not to kill us.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
