20.10.2004

Battle for Fallujah rages

British troops should not be in Iraq - north or south, says Paul Greenaway

Iraq is turning into a quagmire for imperialism. Since last week the battle for Fallujah has raged, with US forces pounding the city day and night. But for all their military might and hardware, the occupiers have not been able to defeat the “foreign terrorists” in charge of the town. Clearly, the conquest and pacification of Iraq is proving to be no “cake walk”.

Now, we have the latest incidence of ‘mission creep’. The US has ‘requested’ further British assistance in the war against the Iraqi people, in the form of 650 troops of the Black Watch battalion to be sent to the ‘hot spots’ of Latifiya and Iskandariya, south of Baghdad. Officially, these extra British troops are to be sent as “backfill” to US forces, who intend to mount a full frontal assault on Fallujah, with the suggestion that the Black Watch battalion will guard the supply routes between that city and Baghdad.

But seeing how the US already has more than 132,000 US troops in this region, it is hard not to view this request as anything other than a nakedly political manoeuvre designed to make it even harder for the British government to extricate itself from Iraq. This suspicion is further increased by the fact that the US presidential elections are only weeks away, with all the evidence pointing to yet another cliff-hanger - it maybe even be down to Florida again, ‘hanging chads’ or not, to decide the next US president. However, whatever the real reason behind the request, communists call for the immediate withdrawal of all US and British troops from Iraq.

In his statement to parliament on Tuesday, UK defence secretary Geoff Hoon resembled a used-car salesman trying to shift a complete wreck - so pathetically unconvincing was his position. So, according to Hoon, no decision had yet been taken on whether to accede to the US request - definitely not. However, he went on to say, Britain would be “failing in its duty” to an ally if it refused to help the US - after all, there was a “very clear operational justification” behind the request. Hoon reassured MPs that British troops will continue to “operate under British rules of engagement” - which is hypocritical code for ‘We Brits are far more civilised than those Rambo-like Yanks’. Hoon added that when stationed in Latifiya and Iskandariya - though, of course, no such decision has been taken - Black Watch soldiers “will have to be less restrained if there is a direct physical threat to them”.

Iraqis are already familiar with their usual gentlemanly British ‘restraint’. For instance, in Amara - a city north of Basra - this took the form in August of firing 30,000 rounds in 10 days. As one defence source put it, in a “war-fighting” situation, British rules of engagement can be just as “robust” (read ruthlessly brutal) as the American ones (quoted in The Guardian October 19). Communists have no reason to contradict such an eminent opinion.

Unsurprisingly, Hoon’s statement provoked a round of anguish and soul-searching from amongst the Labour ranks, not mention a ripple of disquiet from some Tory MPs. Backbench angst was deepened the next day by Blair’s asinine comment that “if” the Black Watch was redeployed, they would still be “back for Christmas”. Wasn’t that what they said in 1914?

In a common lament, Robin Cook, former cabinet member and vocal Blair critic, worried that British troops will be “tarred” by association with the US’s “aggressive” tactics in Iraq - contrasting it to the supposed British “success” story in Basra, mainly attributed to the military’s experience of ‘peace-keeping’ in Northern Ireland. If we are to believe Cook et al, civilised, ‘rational’ imperialism is the answer - with its charming internment camps, H-Blocks, state assassination squads, Bloody Sunday, Diplock courts, etc.

There was more Labour dissent. Dennis Skinner declared: “I and many others do not take kindly to the idea that we are being engaged with president Bush and the Pentagon in order to bail them out.” In similar vein, Labour MP Eric Illsley told BBC radio’s World at one that Hoon’s pronouncement “drags us into the US election campaign, whether we like it or not”. Showing the state of discontent, a group of 45 Labour MPs have urged a Commons vote before Britain agrees to the US request. In the motion the MPs, led by the anti-war Alice Mahon, state that any such move would “significantly increase the risk” to British troops.

Yes, communists support the call for a parliamentary vote on this issue - the debate and discussion generated might prove to be another embarrassment for Blair and the warmongers, whose lies are already totally threadbare and discredited. Any site that can further spread anti-war views is to be welcomed. But we are not motivated by a sense of patriotic concern for the well-being of ‘our boys’ in Iraq, or by a chauvinistic, narrow anti-Americanism. Quite the opposite. As internationalists and anti-imperialists, we communists want to forge solidarity between British and Iraqi workers, as part of a movement that will force ‘our boys’ out of Iraq. Imperialism, as a world system, can bring nothing but barbarism and bloodshed to Iraq.

The ongoing battle for Fallujah starkly confirms this fact, with the current US action pictured as part of the drive to “create security” ahead of the planned Iraqi elections in January. For them to acquire any degree of political or moral legitimacy, it is necessary to draw up of an electoral roll of some 12 million before December. Obviously, to achieve this task US-UK/Iraqi puppet government forces need to ‘secure’ all the major cities and towns. Hence the ferocity of the battle in and around Fallujah.

In April, the last time imperialist and resistance forces clashed in Fallujah, some 1,000 civilians were killed. This time round the death toll could be much higher - imperialism really means business. We saw this demonstrated on October 14, when US forces arrested Sheikh Khaled al-Jumeili, the chief negotiator for the city, when talks broke down after he rejected demands from the Iraqi prime minister, Ayad Allawi, to hand over “foreign militants” - including the notorious Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, whose reactionary Tawhid wal Jihad movement killed the UK hostage, Ken Bigley. Stepping up the pressure, Kassim Daoud, Iraq’s national security adviser, insisted that there would be an offensive if these “militants” were not handed to the government/occupation forces - “We have a timetable and we will stick to it”.

Meanwhile, the road to Baghdad has been blocked and the potential for a slaughter increased. Showing the ‘get tough’ mentality of the occupation forces, as fighting escalated on October 19, the US military released a communiqué stating that it had “struck several buildings linked to the network of wanted militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi”. The raids, the statement continued, aimed to “thwart the Zarqawi terrorist network plans to attack the Iraqi government and its people during Ramadan”. It added: “Multiple secondary explosions indicate a significant amount of explosives or ammunition inside the houses.” Or maybe it indicates that the US is raining down high explosives and death upon the citizens of Fallujah. Communists unequivocally support the people of Fallujah in their daunting struggle against imperialism - while at the same time criticising the brutal and counterrevolutionary politics of groups like Tawhid wal Jihad.

Resistance to imperialism is spreading throughout Iraq. At the beginning of the week, four Iraqi national guards were killed and at least 80 injured in a mortar bombardment directed against their headquarters in Mushahida, situated 25 miles north of Baghdad. Hit and run attacks on the occupation forces are a daily occurrence. Last month there were an average of 87 armed attacks on US forces each day. That was higher than August, which was in turn higher than July. In other words, we are beginning to see features of a national uprising. Communists and democrats in Iraq must fight to shape and gain hegemony over this burgeoning national movement - otherwise it will be there for the taking by the likes of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Muqtada al-Sadr, who will then strangle the Iraqi working class.

Displaying its desperation, next week the stooge Allawi government will declare a nationwide arms amnesty - an ‘cash-for-arms’ scheme is already underway in Baghdad’s Sadr city. Communists, on the other hand, fully support the arming of the Iraqi working class - essential if it is to defend itself from both the imperialists and the islamists.