One year on, don’t mention the war

This is an extended version of my Sun Herald column, published yesterday.

 

Late last year while having coffee with a few Liberal backbenchers in Canberra, I mentioned the latest twist in the Iraq war. �But it�s over, isn�t it?� one replied. We looked at each other for a moment, scandalised. Later, the politician whispered in my ear,�I�m worried too.�

Perception and reality. Politics and truth. My guess is that the politician�s first response was based on the fact that the war wasn�t registering as a big issue with voters at the time. Howard had claimed victory early, welcoming home our troops as victors while their US and British colleagues remained to face death and mayhem. Australians had moved on, he pronounced.

Not true. Australians, most of whom opposed our participation in the war without UN backing, were thankful no Australian soldiers died and hoped for the best, despite our strong misgivings. Webdiarist Christian Wesely wrote:

�I�m an Austrian who spends several weeks each year with average Australians. Last year we walked Namibia in August and September and although locals referred to the ‘criminals’ Bush and Blair the name Howard didn’t escape from Australian lips once, and these were ALP inclined people! The talk was football and everything political seemed embarrassing. Australians try to hide their participation in the Iraq-war similar to Austria�s denial of its role during WW2.�

Al Qaeda and Saddam were enemies because Saddam ran a secular nation, not an Islamic one. Yet last week, just before the war entered its second year, US military commanders admitted that resistance in Iraq was now dominated by Islamic fundamentalists, not Saddam loyalists. Great. Thanks to Bush and our PM, Al Qaeda is taking on the Americans in a war WE started and don�t know how to end and winning new recruits and new power through Muslim resentment at Western occupation of a Muslim country after an illegal war. In the battle for �hearts and minds� we�ve stuffed up big time.

Howard took us to war against a powerless nation on a lie to appease the Americans, after the top British intelligence body, the Joint Intelligence Committee, warned that invading Iraq would INCREASE the risk of terrorism, as it has. No wonder Howard squashed Australian Federal Police chief Mick Keelty for daring to be honest last Sunday.

Yes, Spain�s hardline support for Bush�s war despite the opposition of more than 90 percent of the Spanish people could well be linked to the attack. Keelty said. �There’s a level of honesty that has to exist here� not only in Australia but in our region.� But John Howard can�t afford to be honest, because he�d lose office for being dishonest before the war. So he pretends he told us the truth when he said the war would reduce terrorism and not make us a greater target, belittled Keelty � our frontline policeman against terror – and let Alexander Downer tag him a dupe of Al Qaeda propaganda. The spectacle of Howard�s hand picked Defence force chief Cosgrove jumping to attention to back Howard�s spin and disagree with Keelty�s honesty makes us feel even less safe. Suddenly Howard is not the �man of steel� we need, but, well, scary.

The Spanish people sacked a government which lied to them after their terrible tragedy by blaming local group ETA to save its skin. Times of national crisis require leaders who inspire trust, not spinners who so confuse self-interest with the national interest that they lie over the bodies of their citizens.

The cover of last week�s Economist magazine tells the story of the changed climate since Spain elected a bloke who promised to focus on the war on terror, not on backing Bush�s imperial ambitions whatever the cost to ordinary people.

Remember the Yanks� pack of cards with faces of their most wanted Iraqis? The cover is four Aces – Blair (hearts), Howard (diamonds), Bush (spades) and former Spanish leader Aznar (clubs), whose face is crossed out. The headline: �One down, four to go?�

Webdiary sizzled with reader comment this week, pro and anti war, as the Madrid atrocity forced many to engage again and try to work out the best way forward for our nation.

Shaun O�Brien wrote: “This is a war between those who hate the US and those who support/have similar cultures as the US and nothing more.”

Michael Grimes replied: �How simplistic is that? If we simply assume away the root causes of terrorism, we are left with no option but to pursue a policy of all-out war, which has been spectacularly unsuccessful so far.�

If you want to get up to speed on what�s happening in Iraq, I recommend the website of Michigan history professor and Iraq expert Juan Cole at www.juancole.com. As Webdiarist Jenny Green wrote this week: �We haven�t got a chance of sorting out this mess unless we all make the effort to understand what�s going on before we rush to fight it. The military knows this � the concept of studying your enemy is as old as history.�

***

READER QUOTE OF THE WEEK

John Carson: �We must balance two important attitudes. One is the steadfastness and determination without which we will not succeed in any difficult endeavour. The other is the critical reflection which causes us to examine whether our current efforts are likely to succeed or whether a change of approach is needed. Too much single minded determination makes us stupid, unable to adapt and find alternatives to failed strategies. Too much reflection robs us of our determination.�

Leave a Reply