Commenting on General Petraeus’s testimony to Congress, Liberal Democrat Leader Ming Campbell said:
“This report changes nothing from the standpoint of the United Kingdom.
“There is no case for the continuing open-ended commitment of British forces.
“Nor does General Petraeus provide any help to the British Government in answering the two fundamental questions – what military purpose is being achieved and what political objectives are being met by our continued presence in Iraq.
“I repeat my call for a framework for phased withdrawal of all British forces.â€
IThat we went in to liberate the Iragis from dictatorship
This is precisely the problem – there’s no firm objective in Iraq. What’s the primary mission of our troops? Free Iraq from dictatorship? Win the war on terror? Stop the constant, very high level of violence?
British troops have acquitted themselves with oustanding bravery in a very difficult situation. But there’s just nothing left to be achieved in Iraq. The rule of law is absent, and the power vacuum has been filled by hundreds of violently competitive militias. If the largest possible US Army deployment, combined with UK forces, cannot even make a difference to Baghdad – which all the world’s media are saying they have not – then the country is, if not lost, then beyond further effective Western influence.
I think Ming is right that it would be better to withdraw UK (and US) forces from Iraq in favour of redployment in Afghanistan, where there is a battle that can, if we act wisely and decisively, be won.
Without anything definable to win, there is no absolutely no justification for continued British losses.
Plus, if you think capturing Osama will help to win the ‘war on terror’, shouldn’t we be looking in the place where he was last spotted?