Garth George: In the liberation of Iraq, US and allies must stand firm

COMMENT

Said our front-page lead story on the chaos in Iraq on Tuesday: "Despite the grim developments, the New Zealand troops will remain in Iraq as long as they can perform their duties."

At which I muttered, "I should bloody well think so", before wondering what sort of ninny would even raise the possibility of our troops' withdrawal just because the bullets and bombs are flying around with renewed vigour.

So it was comforting to read a bit further down a confirmation from the Chief of Defence Force, Air Marshal Bruce Ferguson, that our contingent had no plans to abandon their mission. Said he: "New Zealanders aren't in the habit of cutting and running when the going gets tough." To which I muttered, "Hear, hear!"

And the next day to read Defence Minister Mark Burton say that there were no plans to review the presence of our engineers in Iraq. "It's always been a potentially dangerous situation," he said.

Considering the number of peaceniks and milksops in the Labour Party and its hangers-on, it's great to see the realists in the Administration prepared to stand firm.

It is, after all, the job of our military personnel to go into harm's way. That's what they're trained for and paid for and they do it on behalf of all of us. They deserve our wholehearted support, including the prayers of those who are in the habit.

Servicemen and women, all of whom chose their careers, are first and foremost trained to fight and, as far as possible, to avoid being killed. Only then are they specialists in various fields, and our engineers in Iraq are no exception.

I suspect, too, that they are better officered and more able to take care of themselves than most of the thousands of American grunts and GIs who have been sent to Iraq, many of whom are not volunteers.

Thank heavens we don't have in New Zealand an organisation such as the anti-war Military Families Speak Out in the United States. If there was ever an example of biting the hand that feeds you, that would have to be it.

As for the liberation of Iraq itself, which certainly hasn't gone according to plan, I just hope that George W. Bush and his team have the courage to persevere, although I would be happier if so much influence did not reside in such irredeemable right-wingers as Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Those who oppose the war and interpret today's chaos there as further evidence that it was wrong in the first place to overthrow Saddam Hussein are both morally wrong and intellectually dishonest.

If Iraq is a violent place today, it was even more so under Saddam's rule when kidnapping and murder were perpetrated by agents of the state.

As the Sunday Telegraph in Britain observed in an editorial last weekend: "Iraq may seen bloodier now because the bloodshed is carried out in public, before the cameras of a free media. It was not possible to film the tens of thousands of dissidents who were seized in the middle of the night by Saddam's thugs.

"The sole testimonials to that horror are the torture chambers and mass graves in which human rights groups estimate that 300,000 Iraqi men, women and children ended their lives ...

"It will take time for Iraqis to gain confidence in a more transparent political system. Yet, although post-war Iraq is a turbulent place, it still contains the seeds of hope: that in the future the country might have a Government that reflects the wishes of its people."

As for the kidnappings, the governments of every nation whose citizens are under threat must make it absolutely clear that the abductions will not deflect them from their involvement in reconstructing Iraq. To bend to the will of ignorant, murderous fanatical thugs would irreparably damage the stability and freedom of Iraqis.

And to those who are perplexed at the sudden alliance of the disparate ethnic and religious factions in Iraq, perhaps the best explanation is in the words of an age-old proverb of the Arab world: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

* A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the need for Maori and Pakeha to learn one another's words and wished Maori TV all the best in giving us a better understanding of one another. I received a large number of email responses from readers, all of them favourable except this one:

"Normally I tend to agree with your utterances, but this time you have gone overboard. Just as east is east and west is west, I feel I will never have anything in common with Maori. They have absolutely no interest in European culture and I do not expect them to have any.

"Likewise, I have no interest in Polynesian culture and why should I? I expect my grandchildren to learn European languages for a start, and have recently paid the necessary fee to [named] primary school so my eldest granddaughter can learn French. Enough of this nonsense. Vive la difference."

Which, in a few words, shows us just what we're up against. Sad, isn't it?

* Email Garth George

Herald Feature: Iraq