BASRA: WHERE LESS FORCE IS MORE PEACE

We can observe some of the consequences of the American military posture in Iraq, including what Robert Fisk described as “the end of history”. The point is taken up by John Curtis, Keeper of the Middle East, British Museum.

L Reichard White has another set of measurements by which this vaunted policy can be assessed:

The latest tally suggests that approximately 1.2 million Iraqis out of a prewar population of 27 million have been killed since the beginning of “Shock and Awe.” The latest estimates are that an additional 4 million Iraqis have been displaced. That’s about 15 percent of Iraq’s population, equivalent to having about 45 million Americans homeless, with half dispersed to other countries.

It is a strange argument to those who cherish the belief that military force and fear installs civil order that taking out the military will actually increase peace. That at least is what the British are suggesting will be the case now in Basra:

White summarizes:

According to British Ministry of Defense spokesperson Lt. Col. Patrick Sanders, then, “over 90 percent of the attacks [in Basra] are against British forces.” And, according to British journalist Patrick Cockburn, “even after four years in Basra, the British military controls few parts of the city” and it is “one of the most futile campaigns ever fought by the British army.” Further, once we leave, says Sanders, “Basra will become a calmer and less violent place.”

The one thing we must never do is ever admit we were wrong. No. The one thing we must always do is admit we were wrong. Then wonder why.

Postscript: 30 September 2007.

In the aftermath of the British strategic withdrawal from the downtown to their airport base, The Christian Science Monitor, via Informed Comment, reports ascent of a puritan form of Islam in what used to be one of Iraq’s most liberal cities.