| |
19 March 2003
CLOSE
The Extraordinary Achievements of the Anti-War Movement
WAR PLAN IRAQ Update Number 17
BRITAIN NEARLY DISCONNECTED FROM THE WAR
The anti-war movements around the world have achieved a great
deal. In combination with other movements around the world, the
British movement, which reached an unprecedented size and breadth
for a pre-war opposition, exerted such pressure on the British
Government that a week ago it seriously considered withdrawing
from the invasion of Iraq.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BRITISH CONTRIBUTION
Britain was always an important part of Washington's public relations
strategy. Throughout this crisis the US public has been very concerned
at the idea of being politically isolated - polls in the US in
June and Aug. 2002 found that while more than half of Americans
would approve of military action against Iraq if the US won some
allied support, that number shrank to a minority if the United
States had to go it alone. (Christian Science Monitor,
17
July 2002; 'Poll: Most Americans Back War Against Iraq', Reuters,
12 Aug. 2002)
Now, the polls show a similar strength of feeling: 'research from
the National Journal showed the importance of the UK
in the Bush administration's domestic political calculation: 77
per cent of people said "we absolutely need" to have
British support in the event of war in Iraq.' (FT, 14
Mar. 2003, p. 2)
The British contribution has also become militarily significant,
much to everyone's surprise. Edward Luttwak, senior fellow at
the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Washington
DC: 'the military weight of the British contribution has shifted
back and forth from very important, to just nice-to-have, to renewed
importance.
'Originally, fresh from the success of air-ground operations in
Afghanistan, Mr Rumsfeld wanted to go light and fast... At that
point, the British 7th Armoured Brigade, Royal Marine Commando
Brigade, 16th Air Assault Brigade with its infantry, Paras and
SAS, and the RAF's Tornado and Harrier squadrons, would have amounted
to one-third of the
entire force.'
Then, for various reasons, the US deployment was enlarged, and
'the British role became smaller and smaller.' But then Turkey
refused access to US ground forces. 'With the Turkey-bound forces
still stuck on the wrong side of the Suez Canal, British forces
in Kuwait are
once more indispensable,' observes Luttwak. 'The US Marine expeditionary
force depends heavily on British armour, while the US Army's advance
to Baghdad would be much too slow without the advance guard of
air-landed forces that includes the British Air Assault Brigade.
Sandwiched together, with units under each other's command, Yanks
and Brits are more closely integrated than they have been since
the Second World War - and that is why a last- minute withdrawal
by Mr Blair has become simply unthinkable.' (Sunday Telegraph,
16 Mar., p. 6)
THINKING THE UNTHINKABLE: DISCONNECTION
It may have been unthinkable for Luttwak, but it wasn't unthinkable
in Whitehall. 'By Tuesday [12 Mar.], there were serious worries
in the White House that Mr Blair, its staunchest ally, might not
survive the political crisis at home. Geoff Hoon, the Defence
Secretary, tried to explain the problems to Donald Rumsfeld, the
US defence secretary, in a telephone call which had meant to be
devoted to the fine detail of the war plan.
'As we reveal today, Mr Hoons department [the Ministry of Defence]
was frantically preparing contingeney plans to "disconnect"
British troops entirely from the military invasion of Iraq, demoting
their role to subsequent phases of the campaign and peacekeeping.
'Mr Rumsfeld - who had always believed that the "UN route"
was the road to perdition - was already deeply exasperated by
Mr Blair's insistence that a second resolution was necessary,
and the delays that the horse-trading at the UN was causing. Mr
Rumsfeld confided to one friend, "I am learning to hate the
British."
'However, he decided to give them a way out. Later that day, at
a press conference in Washington, Mr Rumsfeld suggested that US
troops could go to war without the British if necessary. One Cabinet
Minister said, in tones of desperation: "It is just Rumsfeld
being
Rumsfeld." The British media was encouraged to believe that
the US Defence Secretary had been speaking hypothetically.
'The trouble was that he hadn't been doing any such thing. As
a senior Number 10 official said: "Rumsfeld was telling the
truth." The cat was out of the bag: Mr Hoon stormed into
the whip's office at the Commons, grim-faced and appalled. This,
of course, was exacty what the Labour rebels wanted to hear: that
British troops were not needed and that Mr Blair could withdraw
them forthwith. In a second call on his secure telephone, Mr Hoon
told Mr Rumsfeld in blunt terms that his remarks were causing
pandaemonium. "Wobbly Tuesday" was the lowest point
of the crisis for Mr Blair.' (Sunday Telegraph, 16 Mar.,
p. 18)
US HAWKS TURN ON BLAIR
There is another angle on the Rumsfeld remarks, which does not
contradict the preceding account, but gives a less benign (and
probably more accurate) interpretation of Rumsfeld's intentions:
'Hawks in the White House have criticised Tony Blair for his persistence
in seeking a new United Nations resolution... An outspoken attack
on Mr Blair's policy at the UN by a Bush administration official
reflected growing tensions in Anglo-American relations.
"Blair is hurting himself by dragging this out," the
official said. "It's not for Americans to tell British politicians
how to behave. but what is he getting out of this? He should just
stand up and say: Were ready to go." '
'Previously, even the most hard-line aides in the US government
had shied away from any sniping at Mr Blair, characterising him
as a "stand-up guy" trying to do his best in the face
of a difficult domestic situation. But the mood has darkened...
Several sources within the Bush administration have said that
the comments on Tuesday by Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary,
that America might have to go to war without Britain, were an
expression of frustration and a shot across Mr Blairs bows.
'The senior official suggested that the comments had forced the
Prime Ministers hands. "In effect, he disagreed with Mr Rumsfeld's
notion that Britain wouldn't participate. Well if that's the case
what are they waiting for? He gets nothing out of this. This is
just masochistic. Were just haemorrhaging for no purpose. Theres
no up-side here other than for Blair. Were being kicked around
worldwide... I just think this is a fool's chase. The whole thing
is. What is anybody getting by waiting if you believe Saddam is
not going to disarm? Why not just go for it?" '(Telegraph,
14 Mar., p. 16)
HOON BLAMED
Yet another perspective was provided in the Sunday Mirror:
'Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon faces the sack as soon as the conflict
in Iraq is over. Tony Blair has decided to give "Duff
Hoon" his marching orders after the Minister's latest blunder
nearly derailed the Governments war strategy... Mr Blair was furious
after Mr Hoon's American counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, declared
that the US could engage in a military conflict without Britain.
His statement followed a lengthy telephone conversation with Mr
Hoon who, colleagues believe, "over-reached" himself
in stressing the Government's difficulties over the war.
'During the transatlantic telephone conversation on Tuesday, Mr
Hoon stressed the political problems the Government was having
both with MPs and the public. But according to one Whitehall source,
he gave Mr Rumsfeld the impression that Britain would not play
a front-line role. Both the Ministry of Defence and the Pentagon
rapidly back-tracked.
The PM later had to give Mr Bush his personal assurance that British
troops were ready to make a "significant contribution"
to any conflict. Mr Blair was also forced to make a statement
to the Commons.' (Sunday Mirror, 16 Mar., p. 6)
The newspaper pointed out that 'Mr Hoon was NOT on the list of
Cabinet members invited to Number 10 yesterday to finalise plans
for the war... The PM will not remove Mr Hoon in the middle of
a military conflict involving British troops, but he is expected
to conduct a major Cabinet reshuffle before the summer.' (Sunday
Mirror, 16 Mar., p. 6)
DELAY AND DISCONNECTION
The British anti-war movement was a major factor forcing Tony
Blair and George Bush down the UN route - and this has been a
major source of delay in the war timetable. The French and other
anti-war movements were major factors in denying the US and UK
their much-prized 'second resolution' - thus making it crystal
clear that the war is illegitimate and illegal. These are significant
achievements for popular movements with very limited resources
and a sketchy organisational framework.
The accounts currently available indicate that the British anti-war
movement inside and outside the Labour Party was powerful enough
to make the British Government seriously consider, and to draw
up desperate contingency plans for, the withdrawal of British
troops
from the imminent invasion of Iraq - despite Britains critical
political and military role in such an expedition. This withdrawal
might well have delayed or derailed the US war.
It may be that Geoff Hoon misrepresented or overstated the Governments
problems. It may be that Donald Rumsfeld used the occasion to
vent his frustration with British-inspired delays in the war timetable
- and twisted the knife, wounding British military self-regard.
However, there seems no reason to doubt the newspaper most closely
associated with the British Armed Forces in its confident revelation
that contingency plans were drawn up last week for a humiliating
and no doubt chaotic shift from invasion to peace-keeping duties
for the British forces in the Gulf.
Governments prize the appearance of overwhelming strength and
confidence. One of the greatest weapons of any government is the
illusion of invulnerability and irreversibility. We now know that
this war was avoidable and that Mr Blair is not an irresistable
force. Our
movement shook him and his Government to its core. Next time we
will win.
BOOK
War Plan Iraq: Ten Reasons Why We Shouldn't Launch Another War
Against Iraq by Milan Rai
'An excellent weapon for all those opposed to Bush's war'.
Tariq Ali
'Excellent'. Alice Mahon MP
'Required reading for anyone concerned
about the risk of war'. Professor Paul Rogers, Bradford
School of Peace Studies
'Timely and important'. Hilary
Wainwright
£10 plus £1.80 p&p.
Please make cheques to ARROW Publications, and send with your
address to 29 Gensing Rd, St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex TN38
0HE.
^ back
to the top
|
