The Hindu Business Line : <I>Will the nightmare ever end? </I>

The occupation of Iraq has cost the US nearly $300 billion, and, since there is no knowing when it will be able to pull out of the quagmire, the drain on its coffers might swell to astronomical proportions. More than the money, the American and British casualties (2,783 and 119 respectively, at last count) are causing the most acute mental trauma.

The world's most advanced industrial country and militarily the most powerful, to boot, has been unable to bring the anarchical conditions in Iraq under control. It is bogged down in a land with whose language, culture and ways of life it has nothing in common, all because of its monumental miscalculation that everything would go to its plans and commands once its political, diplomatic and military whiz-kids took charge in Baghdad. Both the US and the UK did not factor into their calculus, that has gone so dreadfully awry, the continued spirited resistance put up by Iraqi insurgents to such deadly effect.

The situation is becoming unbearably calamitous because of the failure of all the efforts for an orderly transition. The hope that the occupation forces will be able to pass on the responsibility for law and order and security to Iraqi personnel trained for the purpose has been dashed to the ground.

Caught in a trap

The Iraqi Government, such as it is, has shown itself to be utterly incapable of coping with the demands made on it on every count. Having allowed themselves to be caught in a trap by invading Iraq on the fabricated charge of the Saddam regime's possession of weapons of mass destruction and its collaboration with al Qaeda terrorists, the US and the UK are finding that it may take an indefinitely long time for them to extricate themselves from the mess of their own making.

The strain has begun to tell on both countries. Some months ago, the US Secretary of Defence, Mr Donald H. Rumsfeld, became the target of some pungent criticism by retired Generals of the Armed Forces and the Marines, apparently reflecting the discontent among the serving top brass as well. The ground for their anger and demand for sacking him was that he and "the bunch" around him "have made fools of themselves, and totally underestimated what should be needed for a sustained conflict" in Iraq.

A week ago, the British Army Chief, General Sir Richard Dannatt, came out openly blaming the dire straits of the British troops mired in Iraq on the lack of anticipation of the consequences of entanglement in Iraq and poor planning, and calling for pulling out the troops "sometime soon". Whereas the stand of the Government, as expounded by the Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, has been that a withdrawal from Iraq would be "a craven act of surrender that will put (the UK's) future security in deepest peril".

Such a blunt expression by an Army Chief of an opinion contrary to Government policy is unheard of in a country with a strong and long tradition of civilian supremacy over the military. That shows the extent of fissures in both countries.

B. S. Raghavan

More Stories on : Politics | Terrorism | Offhand

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Railways on a roll

A cartel in the air?

Greed leads to global ruin

Will the nightmare ever end?

Creating the knowledge creators of tomorrow

Mining policy: Iron out the leasing issues

A Nobel model that links peace and economics

Poverty and child labour

Budget 2007