Saturday, March 31, 2007
The Iraq War Remains Just
I fully supported the 2003 decision to send coalition forces into Iraq, and the objectives I supported were..
Now, almost 4 years on, the situation in Iraq looks rather bleak. There is the possibility of civil war, and the break-up of the country. The horrific casualty rates are far higher than anyone could have expected. Various nations have already abandoned Iraq, with the UK soon to follow - and crucially, the USA seems also to be decided on the need for a setting deadline.
So, I am sat here at my desk, reading the news from my BBC News Ticker, and thinking to myself "Boy, I really f****d up in my judgement! What was I thinking? Surely now I must admit the Iraq war was a mistake"
But... to have hindsight! I look back at those reasons I gave at the start of the war, and I remain persuaded. So the question is: does the justification of a war change according to how well the war is going? I cannot think of an example where this was the case - would I have decided that Nevile Chamberlain's decision to declare war on Germany in 1939 was unjustified if we really were, in Churchill's immortal words, reduced to fighting on the beaches, the landing grounds, the fields and in the streets? Would the raising of the swastika on the Houses of Parliament have made the fight against fascism any less moral?
The facts remain. There is more terrorism in Iraq today than there was when we 'went in'. That does not change the fact that, now as then, the west must battle against terrorism and the Islamic fascists that perpetrate it. The new democratic government stumbles and jolts along, barely capable of exerting its will across Baghdad, let alone the whole country. That does not change the fact that, now as then, freedom is and will always - always - be worth the spilling of blood. Dictators and tyrants from Iran to North Korea continue to develop or plan to develop nuclear technology in flagrant violation of countless UN resolutions and international law. Does that somehow affect the morality of halting Saddam Hussein in his plans to develop WMD? Or the need to enforce UN Resolution 1441?
I don't know of numbers, but there are certain people who have "changed their minds" about Iraq because currently it is not going well. Are they saying they have changed their minds about the original jus in bello for the start of war, or that just causes somehow become unjust when they face difficulty and those "in the right" are on the back foot? (Or is it simply that the poll numbers are no longer in their favour?)
I reaffirm my support. I will support liberal democracy, tolerance and secular government even should they loose - in Iraq, in another country, or even at home.
I implore others to do the 'hindsight test'. Are you guilty of changing your mind in this way?
- To remove "President" Saddam Hussein and the threat he posed to the stability of the region
- To destroy the Iraqi safe haven for terrorists and terror money (since the invasion we have had it confirmed that Saddam hosted various wanted terrorists with connections to Al-Qaeda)
- To assist the Iraqi people in liberating their country, to establish democracy and the rule of law, and to produce - eventually - a modern, progressive, liberal society
- To uphold and enforce international law, and to attempt to demonstrate to other tyrannies that the will of the 'international community' actually matters
Now, almost 4 years on, the situation in Iraq looks rather bleak. There is the possibility of civil war, and the break-up of the country. The horrific casualty rates are far higher than anyone could have expected. Various nations have already abandoned Iraq, with the UK soon to follow - and crucially, the USA seems also to be decided on the need for a setting deadline.
So, I am sat here at my desk, reading the news from my BBC News Ticker, and thinking to myself "Boy, I really f****d up in my judgement! What was I thinking? Surely now I must admit the Iraq war was a mistake"
But... to have hindsight! I look back at those reasons I gave at the start of the war, and I remain persuaded. So the question is: does the justification of a war change according to how well the war is going? I cannot think of an example where this was the case - would I have decided that Nevile Chamberlain's decision to declare war on Germany in 1939 was unjustified if we really were, in Churchill's immortal words, reduced to fighting on the beaches, the landing grounds, the fields and in the streets? Would the raising of the swastika on the Houses of Parliament have made the fight against fascism any less moral?
The facts remain. There is more terrorism in Iraq today than there was when we 'went in'. That does not change the fact that, now as then, the west must battle against terrorism and the Islamic fascists that perpetrate it. The new democratic government stumbles and jolts along, barely capable of exerting its will across Baghdad, let alone the whole country. That does not change the fact that, now as then, freedom is and will always - always - be worth the spilling of blood. Dictators and tyrants from Iran to North Korea continue to develop or plan to develop nuclear technology in flagrant violation of countless UN resolutions and international law. Does that somehow affect the morality of halting Saddam Hussein in his plans to develop WMD? Or the need to enforce UN Resolution 1441?
I don't know of numbers, but there are certain people who have "changed their minds" about Iraq because currently it is not going well. Are they saying they have changed their minds about the original jus in bello for the start of war, or that just causes somehow become unjust when they face difficulty and those "in the right" are on the back foot? (Or is it simply that the poll numbers are no longer in their favour?)
I reaffirm my support. I will support liberal democracy, tolerance and secular government even should they loose - in Iraq, in another country, or even at home.
I implore others to do the 'hindsight test'. Are you guilty of changing your mind in this way?
# posted by Chris Hughes @ 6:09 pm 
