Rod Wise September 15, 2014 at 5:20 pm

Here we go again.

Once more the metaphorical cry of “Boots and Saddles” echoes across Australia, as we gear up for another military plunge into the cesspit that is Iraq, as though engaging in armed conflict in a country in which we have no strategic interest was as superficial as a script from a John Ford western.

This time, we are told, it is to liquidate a “death cult” that epitomises evil. Last time it was to cauterise “weapons of mass destruction” that epitomised evil. Last time, many thousands of deaths later, the supposed reason why we invaded Iraq proved to be at best a fallacy, at worst a downright lie. What will the next “months and months”, in the words of Tony Abbott, show about the world threat posed by ISIS/ISIL? Time will tell. But, unfortunately, more Australian lives may be lost in the telling.

However, there are a few observations that seem to this writer to be essential if this latest adventure is to be seen in any truthful context.

FIRST. The geniuses who orchestrated the 2003 invasion, Bush Junior, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Blair, Howard and the rest of them, have been remarkably silent about these recent developments. And that’s hardly surprisingly, when one considers that those behind the latest flap would argue that they are cementing the legacy of 2003. Evidenced by Abbott claiming that our new involvement is at the request of the Prime Minister of Iraq. (Sounds awfully similar to the claims of the Menzies-Holt government that our involvement in the Vietnam quagmire was at the request of the South Vietnamese government.) Perhaps, with the wisdom of hindsight, those geniuses concede, by their silence, that this latest flap is serving only to confirm how ephemeral and fantastic was their supposed legacy of 2003, a democratic Iraq.

SECOND. Surely, the experience of the years since 2003, with daily news footage of beheadings and suicide bombings, would have told our esteemed leaders that the concept of a democratic Iraq, as we understand it, is ludicrous. That only fools rush in where angels fear to tread, as the old saying goes. The racial antagonisms and the medieval religious obsessions which criss-cross that patch on the map ought to have alerted our leaders by now that throwing your weight around, just because you can, is no substitute for a thoughtful policy that is realistic given the peculiar circumstances that apply in the target country. While Obama may be circumspect in how far he goes this time, he is still reacting to US domestic pressure above all else, and does anyone seriously believe that the Republican blowhard who will inevitably follow him in the White House in 2016, will exercise a similar restraint? Are we doomed, then, to relive all the other failed adventures that have characterised US foreign policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union went to their heads? Like Somalia? Like Afghanistan? Like Libya? Like Syria? Etc, etc.

THREE. The mutually antagonistic mosaic that lies within the arbitrary, cartographic lines that define the boundaries of Iraq ought to daunt any sensible Western policy-maker. While the ultimate enemy, Iran, may be Shi’ite, its people are Persians. Their allies (and our “friends”) in Iraq, the Shi’ite majority, are Arabs. The so-called “Sunni” opposition are both Sunni and Arab. Their “enemies”, the Kurds, are also Sunnis. The north-eastern Kurds, who we are now arming, are part of a wider Kurdistan, that includes great swathes of Turkey and Iran. And we wonder why Turkey won’t come to the party in the fight against ISIS/ISIL when, you can stake London to a brick, that much of the munitions sent to Erbil, will end up in south-eastern Turkey. Iraq is a dog’s breakfast. Especially when you throw in a further element, the Christian minority, which is currently under attack by the Sunni ISIS/ISIL forces although it was once a pillar of the Sunni-dominated Saddam Hussein regime that was overthrown in 2003 by the “Coalition of the Willing”. Iraq was always a can of worms from which the 2003 invasion ripped the lid. That is the real legacy of the Coalition of the Willing.

FOUR. To repeat the point, only fools rush in where angels fear to tread. While the Americans have consistently shown themselves to be over-reaching fools, the real tragedy of the past two decades has been the poor role played by the British. As the power which constructed “Iraq” in the aftermath of the First World War, they, more than any other power, would understand the realities that underpinned balance-of-power diplomacy. After all, they held most of the world in thrall to their influence for a century with an army that could fit into a phone box. But rather than exercise any restraint on the Americans, as the Germans tried to do in 2003, they have consistently refused to be out of step with US foreign policy, apologising for its instinctive adventurism, for no visible return whatsoever. Such is the lingering legacy of their failed Suez expedition in 1956. Such is the true decline of a once-great power.

FIVE. And now our turn. How timely is Australia’s enthusiastic embrace of this latest Iraqi adventure, coming so soon after Abbott’s “tough talk” bombast over Putin and Ukraine. It is so empty and so transparently tailored to Australian domestic considerations, like everything that Abbott does and has ever done, that it is sad to see the Australian media buying the line so readily. The dismal performance of David Irvine, the head of ASIO, in failing to convince us that there is a genuine threat to Australia from returning Jihadists (none of whom is said to have been in ISIS/ISIL), should raise in any sceptical mind, the question about what exactly are we paying for with this elaborate and expensive security apparatus that has been imposed on us. And now we have a new terrorist threat level? Higher, even, than after the Bali bombing? And they won’t tell us exactly why? But coming at a time when the Abbott government is floundering and desperately needs to work out some deal with the Palmer United Party well away from the constant glare of publicity? Don’t make me laugh. What we are actually paying for is protection of the Abbott government. The same government which claimed a budget “crisis” to justify its attacks on the Australian standard of living but which, it seems, can find any amount of money to further its own interests and survival.

FROM ROD WISE, ARMIDALE