Tristan Ewins asked:




As the dust settles in newly ‘liberated’ Iraq, the neo-conservative Right has become increasingly bold and shrill in their denunciations of prior Left opposition to the war. With victory, we are told, has come vindication. Amid apparent signs of jubilation on the ‘Iraqi street’, the Left, so the story goes, has been ‘shamed’ by its ‘blind Anti-Americanism.’ The anti-war movement – which at one stage drew 200,000 onto the streets of Melbourne and Sydney respectively, and perhaps 2 million onto the streets of London, has thus been dismissed as something of a ‘misguided embarrassment’. Meanwhile, many of the Left’s most dire predictions have failed to eventuate, leading some to suggest a crisis of credibility.

It seems pertinent, therefore, to pose the question: what really did happen in Iraq? What is ‘the way forward’ for a movement confronted by triumphant neo-conservative proclamations of ‘victory’ and ‘vindication’? What is more: what does the future hold for Iraq, and what are the Americans likely to do from here?

Counting the Human Cost and accounting for the Collapse

Few saw any reason to doubt the projections of the British medical association, Medact, when it was suggested a war could result in as many as 48,000-260,000 casualties.
(ie: fatalities) Most recently, however, the ‘Iraq Body Count’ web site, drawing from a broad range of sources, estimated that the present civilian death toll stands at approximately 2,700. Some suppose that Iraqi military casualties could range as high as 15,000, but certainly the Pentagon is in no rush to validate or investigate such figures.

Of course, this is only part of the picture. For every fatality, there will be numerous stories of men, women and children: crippled, dismembered, blinded – bearing physical and psychological scars that will last for the remainder of their lives. Unexploded cluster bomblets now litter most Iraqi cities and their immediate environs: a deadly temptation for curious children. Many critics – such as Robert Fisk – also insist a link between the US armed forces’ use of depleted uranium-encased munitions and disturbing instances of cancer. Such critics thus believe the Iraqi people will continue to suffer the cost of this conflict for many years to come.

It is also notable that Iraqi infrastructure, including electricity and water supplies, was seriously damaged during the conflict. The International Committee of the Red Cross, who have been working to restore basic infrastructure in Baghdad and Basra, notes that, “while the situation in central Baghdad has improved, the surrounding poorer suburbs lag far behind, with pools of sewage and heaps of uncollected refuse polluting the streets.” Cholera and Typhoid have also been reported throughout the country, raising the prospect of further casualties. Mercifully, for the citizens of Baghdad and Basra, the swift collapse of formal resistance has enabled quick access for the Red Cross and other relief agencies.

In the final analysis, however, the nightmare scenarios imagined by the Left failed to eventuate. This is not to dismiss the awful toll paid by Iraqi civilians and young conscripts. It is merely to concede that the Left was wrong in its estimates of the scale of the slaughter and human tragedy. Indeed – few foresaw the dramatic swiftness with which resistance in Baghdad collapsed. Entire divisions of Iraq’s much vaunted Republican Guard seemingly melted away into nothingness. Reports of night-vision goggles and potent Russian-made anti-tank weapons finding their way into Iraqi hands, for instance, had this author projecting the possibility of a Chechnya-like scenario for Coalition forces entering Baghdad.

Originally, the official line from Washington suggested the Iraqi collapse was linked to the final destruction of the Republican Guard’s command, control and communications capacity. It is now becoming apparent, however, that years of CIA and MI6 penetration of the Republican and Special Republican Guard finally paid off, with senior defections leading to a collapse in resistance. According to ‘The Express’ of London (4-18-3), and several other publications, senior Iraqi military figures were bribed with gold and cash. According to ‘The Express’, those who failed to co-operate were threatened with death.

Islamic state or secular US client regime?

At first it was possible to be skeptical of stage managed scenes of ‘jubilation’ at the downfall of Saddam Hussein: no more than two hundred Iraqis participating in the destruction of a statue of the dictator in the immediate aftermath of Baghdad’s capitulation. Such scenes were necessary to provide legitimation for the occupying forces in the eyes of the world. They were needed – and so they were produced. This, however, is no longer the case. Tens of thousands of Iraqis: many of them from Iraq’s Shi’ite majority – are on the move. Mass rallies and pilgrimages abound: at once rejoicing at the overthrow of Saddam’s Sunni-dominated regime, and demanding the immediate withdrawal of US forces. Increasingly, inspired and led by a long subdued radical Shi’ite clergy, the call is for an Islamic state.

Surely neither Washington nor the Left can be pleased with this scenario – although for obviously different reasons. Washington points to the hidden hand of Iran behind the recent upsurge in Shi’ite militancy, and surely one would be na