Between Iraq And A Hard Place

(image courtesy Dorking Labs)
The US media reported this straightforwardly and factually, without making note of the implications (domestically as well as in England):

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has insisted that the withdrawal of British troops from the southern Iraqi city of Basra is not a defeat.
The 550 soldiers have handed Basra Palace over to Iraqi control and joined 5,000 UK troops at their last base, near Basra Airport, outside the city.

The MoD said the handover of Basra province was now due in the autumn.

Mr Brown insisted the withdrawal was "pre-planned and organised" and said UK forces would take an "overwatch" role.

The Coalition of the Willing is now us, and Poland. And even the Poles are groping for the exit.

I agree with Brown: the withdrawal of these troops is not an admission of defeat. It's an admission that it was a bloody stupid idea in the first place, and that Blair should have curtailed his bloody-minded instincts and cautioned Bush against invading Iraq.

See, Blair, by his own admission, had considered (no doubt in his cups) invading Iraq long before Bush had entered office, but was shackled by the fact that, well, he'd have to deal with the UN and world community. Clearly, he didn't have the chutzpah of Bush, who just doesn't give a damn.

We in the States often wondered why Blair was a poodle to Bush, when in point of fact, he was not going to get the political cover from a Gore administration to invade Iraq and establish a base for democracy in the Middle East with a Gore presidency. Bush was less a Svengali and more a Clyde to Blair's Bonnie.

In fairness to him, Blair announced the troop withdrawal just before his resignation earlier this year, allowing Brown a graceful way to get Britons out of the country without paying a political price himself. Blair himself is trying to broker a Middle East agreement via the Israelis and Palestinians, and it appears that he has had some success, given the recent outbreak of quiet in that conflict.

Bush's surprise visit to Iraq, in point of fact, may have been a way to deflect some of the coverage of the British withdrawal from the region. By sneaking in, and racing out, Bush would hope to draw the attention away from the men behind the curtain, and while Brown can argue that this is not an admission of defeat, Bush's stunt certainly lends credence to that charge.

The Bush White House, while never particularly deft in policy and promotion, has suddenly turned a tin ear to the events of the day.

All this now puts increasing pressure on the Democrats in Congress to come up with a viable plan to get our troops out, quickly, while staunching the blood from this bizarre and ill-advised incursion into another innocent nation's sovereignty.

Unintentionally Funny

I often wonder if Bush, the great American frat boy, does this kind of stuff deliberately:

LONDON (Reuters) - President George W Bush wrote a lengthy tribute to Prime Minister Tony Blair on his last day in power on Wednesday, describing him as "a strong guy" and dismissing claims that the British leader acted as his "poodle."

[...]"I've heard he's been called 'Bush's poodle'. He's bigger than that," he said. "We're working together to achieve global peace in the face of enormous danger. This kind of thing is just silly ridicule."

Presumably, that's intended to mean that Bush and Blair are equals. But you know, you could take that to mean Blair is "just a bigger dog," like maybe a schnauser or terrier, and Bush is sniggering as he baldfacedly insults Blair (and the UK) while paying him a backhanded compliment.

It's likely better, Dumbya, to just let those kind of comments alone, and to focus on the bigger picture of paying tribute to Blair. Since it's unlikely you actually wrote this letter alone and unassisted, I'm going to presume that you meant to say this, and that you phrased it deliberately ambiguously so as to demean Blair, while saying good bye.

Sort of, "So long, suckah!"

The biggest joke of the letter, tho?

"We have very different speaking styles, of course. He's much more kind of lofty and eloquent than I am. I tend to be just pretty matter of fact."

(emphasis added)

If only...

Whistling Past The Graveyard

On the heels of Tony Blair's visit to America last week, the final one before he turns the reins over to Gordon Brown, current Chancellor of the Exchequer, comes this little item:

LONDON (Reuters) - Washington is confident British prime minister-in-waiting Gordon Brown will not pull British troops out of Iraq early, a senior U.S. official said on Monday.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official told reporters Washington had an "excellent level of discussion and dialogue" with the British government on future policy in Iraq.

Key word there is "early". Blair has already announced the departure of British troops, as early as this summer, reducing British presence below 5,000 troops, which may (or may not) remain until 2008.

Anybody think Gordon Brown is about to speed that timetable up? I don't. I do, however, see him making even deeper cuts in troop levels(h/t, again, Mr. Doggity), particularly in light of the recent flare-ups in the Basra region, which has been the focus of British patrols. These flare-ups seem to have been in anticipation of the now-aborted arrival of Prince Harry.

Brown appears to be slightly less enthused with the EU than Blair, however, as he insisted England remain on the pound, as opposed to swapping over to the Euro. This seems to have been a clever move on his part. The pound has thrived beyond what the Euro has risen to on world markets. Kicking and screaming, tho, England will have to convert, I imagine.

The overarching question for Americans is, will Brown be as big a poodle as Blair?

Answer: probably not. (h/t Mr. Doggity, who really should start blogging...) Although the argument can be made that Brown will respect Blair's commitment to the war (and one suspects that Blair has declared the troop withdrawal to give Brown cover to go beyond his pronouncement), it's clear that Brown is his own man.

Gordon Brown is prepared to risk the future of the "special relationship" with the United States by reversing Tony Blair's support for the Iraq war, President George W Bush has been warned.

He has been briefed by White House officials to expect an announcement on British troop withdrawals from Mr Brown during his first 100 days in power. It would be designed to boost the new prime minister's popularity in the opinion polls.

Details of the talks came as a close ally of Mr Brown called for a quicker withdrawal of British troops. Nigel Griffiths, a former minister, said: "We should get out of Iraq as soon as is practicable. We should consult the Iraqi government - but they cannot have a veto. This cannot be delayed."

One can only hope that Brown will take a page from another "prime minister":

I love that word "relationship". Covers all manner of sins, doesn't it? I fear that this has become a bad relationship. A relationship based on the President taking exactly what he wants and casually ignoring all those things that really matter to, erm... Britain. We may be a small country but we're a great one, too. The country of Shakespeare, Churchill, the Beatles, Sean Connery, Harry Potter. David Beckham's right foot. David Beckham's left foot, come to that. And a friend who bullies us is no longer a friend. And since bullies only respond to strength, from now onward, I will be prepared to be much stronger. And the President should be prepared for that.

Left Alone At The Altar

Well, looks like it might be a bit tougher to support this surge:

LONDON - Prime Minister Tony Blair is expected to announce a timetable for withdrawal of British troops from Iraq today, with around 1,500 set to return home in the coming weeks.

In a move the Bush administration greeted as "a sign of success," Blair will tell the House of Commons a total of about 3,000 British soldiers will leave southern Iraq by year end if security there is sufficient, British media reported, quoting unnamed government officials. The plan could alter if the situation worsened on the ground

Clearly, however, there's been some arm twisting:

LONDON -- Britain said Monday (26.11.2006) it expects to withdraw thousands of its 7,000 military personnel from Iraq by the end of next year, while Poland and Italy announced the impending withdrawal of their remaining troops.

Yah huh. Let's take a quick recap of the Coaltion, shall we?

Italy? Gone.
Australia? Going. Obama is right. Howard should shut his yap about timetables.
Slovaks? Gone.
South Korea? Going.
Denmark? Plucky little country stuck it out longer than expected, especially in the face of the massive Muslim demonstrations over the cartoon furor, but going.
Romania? Going.
Latvia? Going.
Lithuania? Well, they set a timetable for withdrawal for next year, so going.
Poland? Going.

Staying?
Czech Republic (100 policemen)
Armenia (46 peacekeepers)
Estonia (40 soldiers)
Japan (600 humanitarian aid workers)
Palau. I think they're one American-born soldier is sticking it out.

So there you have it. We're the only country in the world dumb enough to send MORE troops to this powderkeg...and now even Tony Blair is getting out while he can.

Bush
Iraq