Look at Northern Ireland for example. Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Irish Republican Army, has accepted the police force in Northern Ireland is a legitimate law enforcement body. Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein’s leader, has said the people of Northern Ireland don’t want to live in a jungle. A police force is necessary to maintain order. The IRA has decommissioned its arms and say it will not take up arms again against the United Kingdom.

Now, Sinn Fein wants to be part of a legitimate government of Northern Ireland. We cannot say Sinn Fein and the IRA lost the war, because they have made significant political gains. The troubles in Northern Ireland lasted decades, but the conflict was resolved eventually. The British troops in Northern Ireland knew what they were fighting for — to maintain Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom.

What about in Iraq? It has been shown that the regime of Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, although there is no certainty that he had not tried to acquire them. Saddam Hussein was a bad man. Few mainstream political leaders in the Western world would argue otherwise. He killed tens of thousands of his own people and his war against Iran killed tens of thousands more. He used poison gas against the Kurds and depopulated the marshes where the Marsh Arabs in southern Iraq lived. Few were unhappy to see him go.

That, however, was not the reason the United States and its Coalition allies went to war. They hoped to change the dynamic in the Middle East to one where the Iranians were contained and the situation in Palestine could be resolved.

The war in Iraq, however, has been far harder and longer than the Americans could have imagined. They got off on the wrong foot by letting the rabble loot the country. While optimism was in the air when the constitution was approved and after the elections, it has not translated into success on the ground.

The Americans have some unpleasant choices ahead of them. Moctada al Sadr, the leader of the most militant private Shiite militia, must be confronted, In Washington, a considerable body of opinion holds that he should be “terminated with extreme prejudice.” Al Sadr’s death squads are virtually running free.

Tell Americans it could take decades to win this war, and they are incredulous. Americans like a war to be like a basketball game — fast and furious, with a clear winner in a short time. The United States is unchallenged in high intensity warfare, but dropping a lot of bombs on Iraq won’t change much — what is needed are boots on the ground.

This type of war is a hard grind — stressful for the troops and the politicians at home. In the U.S., the anti-war movement is growing. The battle-hardened veterans of the fight for peace in Vietnam, led by such old troopers as Jane Fonda, are on the streets again.

It must be said that the U.S. pulling out of Iraq would be a disaster for the Americans, the Middle East and the world. The shameful exit of the Americans from Vietnam was shameful not because they lost, but because of the way the Congress cut off funds to its South Vietnamese allies.

The U.S. now has an all-volunteer army. Recruiting figures have held up, but the strain on the armed forces has been considerable — the steady grind of anti-insurgent warfare is taking its toll on the troops. This is a war the Americans must win. The Bush administration will not pull out — in the short term, it may even boost troop numbers in Iraq — but in 2008 a new administration will be elected. Who can tell then?

Subscribe to The China Post and save.  Click hereSharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Enter your comments - 800 characters max

Receive China Post promos

Respond to this email