Menzies Campbell and Iraq

This is a letter to the Independent on Sunday in response to Campbell's article published 12th March 2006.

Dear Editor,

So now Menzies Campbell is playing the popular `Fantasy World Iraq` game (Independent on Sunday 12th March). He states that the invasion and three-year occupation have been a disaster. He wil get little argument about that from anyone except the warmongers and their ever-dwindling band of apologists. However, he then goes on to claim that `an immediate withdrawal of coalition forces would precipitate even greater violence' than exists now.

He claims that coalition forces are only perceived as occupiers. But the perception is completely accurate for that is what they are. We all know the invasion had nothing to do with (non-existent) WMD; we all know that it had nothing to do with `bringing democracy' to the region. It is very well-known that the neo-cons had it planned as part of their strategy for US control of the Middle East - first Iraq, then Syria, and finally Iran (as we will see in a few weeks' time). The idea is firstly to ensure strategic control of Middle East oil; secondly, to open up the region to further penetration and control of the economy by US corporations; and finally to ensure that the ensuing US client states all support Israel in its continuing theft of Palestinian lands.

To this end the Americans are building a number of extremely large, extremely well-defended permanent bases. They have absolutely no intention of leaving Iraq in the foreseeable future. In the extremely unlikely event of an Iraqi government calling for them to leave, they would simply destabilise and replace the government. The supposedly-democratic Iraqi administration is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Washington plc. The Iraqi `security forces' are completely dominated by the US military and do not have the equipment or the logistical ability to operate independently. This calls into question just who is behind the current death squad phenomenon. Could they operate without at least the tolerance of the Americans? After all, the USA has used this tactic before in Central America, and some neo-cons were openly calling for the same strategy to be utilised in Iraq.

So Menzies Campbell's claim that coalition forces are preventing violence is therefore utterly specious. The permanent presence of US (and other) forces have quite understandably brought the armed resistance into being. This will inevitably continue and grow for so long as the occupation continues. While we can have no certain idea of what will follow if, as they should, all occupiers were to withdraw immediately, we can be sure of what will happen if they continue to stay. The occupation must end immediately. The failure of the Liberal Democrats to support this shows how hollow their claim is to be a radical force in British politics. Any difference betwen them and the other two main parties is paper-thin.

Yours faithfully,

Grouchy.