The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[casi] Iraq: A war-torn year

No mention of the current deprivations facing Iraqis nor the further
damage to infrastructure and institutions caused by this war.

Iraq: A war-torn year

By John Simpson
BBC World Affairs editor

For months, the United States was far less divided than most other
countries about going to war in Iraq.

The old tradition of accepting the president's word and closing ranks
at times of crisis helped the Bush administration greatly as the war
drew closer.

The problems of Iraq are still likely to beleaguer the two leaders
Opinion in most European countries, by contrast, was profoundly
hostile to the war; and no big international event had divided people
in Britain quite so fiercely in recent times.

Leading ex-generals were as critical of the decision to invade Iraq
as well-known peace campaigners.

In the Middle East there was bitter fury and a sense of powerlessness
as the war drew closer.

A powerful belief in their cause drove the US president and the UK
prime minister on. In private as in public, no one at the top of
either government seemed to doubt that Saddam Hussein could genuinely
launch devastating attacks on his enemies with weapons of mass

Afterwards, attention focused on the process of convincing political
and public opinion: had the White House and Downing Street been open
and truthful about the level of threat which Saddam Hussein's Iraq

One leading American politician later said he had been given the
impression at a high-level briefing that Saddam Hussein could now
strike at the US East Coast; and there was immense controversy in
Britain about a government claim that weapons of mass destruction
could be deployed in 45 minutes.

Swift invasion

Once the invasion began, though, public opinion swung round to
support the British forces in the task ahead.

That task was never particularly difficult. The Iraqi air force had
ceased to exist, and most Iraqi soldiers simply wanted the safest and
best way to surrender.

Even the special units stationed behind the front line troops, with
orders to shoot any deserters, were equally anxious to give
themselves up.

The coalition has rejoiced in Saddam's capture
Yet although senior figures in the Bush administration had promised
that the Iraqis would greet the advancing coalition soldiers as
liberators, this was only occasionally true.

Most Iraqis were either scared that the Americans would let Saddam
survive, as they did after the first Gulf War, or genuinely resented
the presence of Western soldiers on Iraqi soil.

At the same time, the new system of allowing "embedded" reporters
with the troops gave remarkable glimpses into a brilliantly planned
and executed military campaign, but it also gave the impression that
there was more resistance to the American and British advance than
there actually was.

Nonetheless, the invasion was certainly not bloodless.

Thousands of Iraqi soldiers were slaughtered before they could
surrender, while human rights organisations accused the Americans of
killing civilians carelessly and unnecessarily.

News organisations remembered the invasion as the one in which the
most journalists were killed in the shortest space of time: 20 in
all. Of those who died in combat, most were killed by the Americans.

Deaths mount

But it was not until after the war that the real resistance began.
One of the strongest advocates of the war, the Deputy Defence
Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, was lucky to escape with his life in
Baghdad, and the American administrator of Iraq, Paul Bremer, just
managed to escape an ambush.

More US soldiers have died in post-war Iraq than during the invasion

As the months wore on, more American soldiers died than had been
killed during the war itself; though the British were able to report
a more stable situation in their zone.

Things got harder and harder for the US and British Governments,
particularly since no evidence whatever was found of Saddam Hussein's
weapons of mass destruction.

And then, two weeks before Christmas, Saddam himself was tracked down
by a superb piece of detection, and surrendered meekly.

This changed the entire character of the American and British
strategy, and gave the increasingly embattled George W Bush and Tony
Blair real hope that they might have turned the corner.

But with the Hutton Inquiry reporting in the New Year on the
circumstances surrounding the death of the UK Government weapons
expert Dr David Kelly, and a potentially difficult election campaign
facing Mr Bush, the problems created by the invasion of Iraq refuse
to go away.

Mark Parkinson

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]