Monday, August 11, 2008

Britain's betrayal of the Iraqi people

From Iraq, the model:

The news about a secret deal between the British and anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr did not come as a surprise to us. Britain’s war policy has been clear for the past several years: the country demonstrated no readiness to make sustained efforts in a prolonged war, nor did it act as a serious partner determined to win the conflict.

There are three aspects in this British betrayal. First, striking a deal with the enemy; second, selling an Iraqi city to the enemy of their Iraqi hosts and partners; and third, by not informing their American partners of their plans, enabling the U.S. military’s reliance on an untrustworthy partner — something the British military leadership turned out to be.

What’s worse — even assuming the “accommodation” was a thoughtful plan with good intentions — is that Britain upheld the deal even when the militias violated it. The militias did not renounce violence (attacks continued), and they did not switch to civil political activity. Still, the British didn’t take action.

1 comment:

JuliaM said...

"...Britain upheld the deal even when the militias violated it."

Well, isn't that what we did in Northern Ireland? And isn't that merely an extension of our justice system in general, where a 'suspended sentence' doesn't mean harsher punishment if you then go on to commit further crimes?

It's a wonder anyone expected anything else...