Entirely, flexibly appropriate
Australia in Iraq - - Posted on February, 19 at 11:34 pm by Ken L
On the face of it, Howard’s announcement that he’s sending 70 more troops to Iraq makes no sense. As Christine notes in comments, even his media supporters were blind-sided by the announcement. He’s spent the last few weeks strenuously explaining why our existing commitment is entirely appropriate and not about to be changed.
In the past he’s argued that he’s guided by the ‘field commanders’ when it comes to troop numbers and they haven’t asked for an increase. Nor has the Iraqi government, nor as far as we know has the US government. J-Ho just got up this morning and thought “What the hey, let’s send some more trainers”. Even though most Australians oppose the occupation and it’s a loser for the government.
Let’s be silly for a moment and pretend Howard was actually trying to do the right thing by the Iraqis without worrying about the local political implications. Do we have another 70 soldiers who are skilled in counter-insurgency operations? If so, why? Patrolling the streets of Baghdad is hardly the kind of thing that would be on the curriculum at ADFA, surely. Are these extra 70 blokes going to train the Iraqis in anything useful?
But of course it’s fantasy to think the decision’s got anything to do with the welfare of Iraqis. As soon as it was announced Howard was getting stuck into Kevin Rudd for opposing it. Except that seems pointless too, because the polls suggest the majority of Australians agree with Rudd.
Maybe Barack Obama’s crack about him putting his troops where his mouth is hit home. Maybe he was scared Cheney was going to put the hard word on him for some more combat troops and now he can say “Oh Dick, I can’t now I’ve just announced the trainer initiative.” Or maybe it just seemed like a good idea after the fourth after dinner Glen Farclas.
Whatever the rationale I’ll be fascinated to see how his media fan club spins it into more evidence that he’s The Master Politician of His Generation. And it also puts to bed the fiction that Iraq has a functioning, autonomous government. Still you’d think he would at least have gone through the motions of asking the Iraqis what they thought before he decided to send off reinforcements to our army of occupation … just for appearance’s sake. Even Dubya was thoughtful enough to do that.
LATER:
Brendan Nelson reckons this whole extra troops thing is ancient history. Planning started before Christmas and what’s more, it’s a response to a direct request by the Iraqi PM. Brendan why didn’t you mention this at the time? I’m sure you realised it would be a matter of public interest. Reflexive secrecy in government isn’t usually the sign of a healthy democracy - read the history of the Nixon presidency when you get a chance.
Iraq’s deputy foreign minister has welcomed the troop trainer announcement. But before anyone gets too excited about the way the Howard Government is cooperating so constructively with the Iraqi government and doesn’t it make the critics look silly,
Iraq could manage without Australian troops if it was given advance warning of any withdrawal, a senior Iraqi government figure says.
…
Asked if the withdrawal would send a negative signal to the US and Britain, Mr Abbawi said: “No … if it is done with an agreement and consultation, I don’t think it will create much problem.”
It all gets curiouser and curiouser.
Posted in Australia in Iraq |
February 20th, 2007 at 12:39 am
Call me a whacko leftoid conspiracy nut, but it couldn’t have anything to do with the Newspoll due out this morning, could it?
*squeals in delight at being acknowledged for perceptive, half-arsed, observations*
February 20th, 2007 at 1:01 am
It’s a wedge. Rat cunning!
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2007/02/19/wedge-training/
February 20th, 2007 at 1:01 am
You’ve gone and italicised the whole blog, Christine!
February 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
John W. Coward, our Aussie PM, argues that he’s guided by field commanders, etc. It couldn’t possibly be his rampant insanity instead, could it?
My god, I pray, when will this nightmare ever end?
Our father, who art in Canberra
Arseholed be his name.
To Kingdom Come, he should be strung,
With Saddam and all the insane.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
What you don’t realise, Mark, is that only you can see the italics.
My powers are truly vast and awesome.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Howard dumps on Bush. Bush dumps on Howard. Too beautiful! Thank you God!!!
I have been waiting a very, very long time for this. Rest assured, Howard is scraping the bottom of the barrel here:
Ooooohhh, yeah baby!!! Where to start, where to start?
How about that word “again”? This implies that Howard has previously asked Bush for assistance, which has not been forth-coming. So Bush has to go back and ask AGAIN for action in support of a major Coalition ally. Which raises the question, did he even make the effort last time, and if so, why was he ignored? Could it have something to do with the fact that he is a lame duck president polling at Nixon levels? Hmmn?
Or what about Howard’s earnest plea that this was “an issue of great concern to the Australian people”? How about, “this was an issue that might save my sorry ass”?
Or what about the “North Korea” angle? Bush rang Howard (not vice versa, please note) pleading for help with North Korea. What’s that all about? I thought a deal had been struck. Is Bush trying to undermine the diplomatic deal with a renewed threat of violence? It basically sounds like Howard told him to go stuff his head up his arse if he cannot provide a little “wiggle room” on David Hicks.
Here we have two political dinosaurs turning on one another after all other available food sources have been exhausted. It’s not a pretty sight, but it is a fascinating one. Stay tuned for more.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
PS” any professional bloggers wanna pick up on my line of thought, please give credit where it is due.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Howard is a NATIONAL SECURITY RISK.
I didn’t say that, Kevin Rudd just said it, in breaking news.
In other words, Rudd just publicly stated what I and many others have been saying for years. This is what was said:
Mr Rudd today accused Mr Howard of failing to learn any lessons from the Iraq war and of sounding increasingly desperate.
“Mr Howard is looming as an increasing risk for Australia’s long-term national security,” Mr Rudd said.
The greatest threat today to Australia is none other than John W. Coward - er Howard. The greatest threat to the western world today is the whacko Real Axis of Evil - Bush, Blair & Howard.
So let’s all ring up the national terrorist/security hotline and bombard them with calls about the REAL national security risk: the lying rat with the gold tooth who’s insanity will lead us all into extinction if he gets his way.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Lucky you phrased that as a question.
Pretty much every ARA deployment since Korea could be characterised as counter insurgency/irregular/guerilla warfare. It’s something of a digger speciality. You’re right in that most of the junior officer trg in this occurs at Duntroon rather than ADFA I suppose.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
And now the government has been good enough to tell us what’s actually going on, it turns out that 50 of the 70 extra personnel will be a team to train and mentor Iraqis in logistics, something we’ve apparently been doing since 2003.
All a storm in a teacup in other words, and I still don’t get why Howard decided to make a big deal of it.
February 21st, 2007 at 12:05 am
‘Kevin’s Getting a Bit Full of Himself’
I dunno Ken. I’m guessing he was hoping the attempted wedge would create those courageous headlines with trademark defiant Churchillian overtones.
You know, ‘MORE TROOPS TO IRAQ’. Convincing gormless pundits of his continued genius. Big splash in the papers. Complete domination of radio and TV.
But the story that’s got the run is the Newspoll results. Well that and ‘First Cabinet Trip to Perth in a Decade’.
The PM’s gutsy decision to use yet more soldiers as a taxpayer funded prop to his re-election campaign has lasted less than 24 hours.
Now we’re back to water and planning a mardi-gras for David Hicks.
He’s not dead yet. But I’ll be buggered if I can’t detect the whiff of rotting cabbage.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:23 am
So the new spin from Club Howard is that Rudd is a flip flopping, everything to everyone, inexperienced tosser.
Tonight on Lateline, it was Billy Bunter’s turn to come to the aid of the party with the freshly minted spiel. In his usual blustering, splenetic, public school petulence, he derided Rudd’s perfectly valid solution to the training of Iraqi troops: i. e. train in them in the comparative safety of a third country, such as Jordon, Kuwait or Qatar, using Aussie Army trainers. This is not only seen by the French (in Qatar) to be an admirable solution, but also by a senior US trainer, Colonel Mansell, who extolls the virtues of, 1, soldiers not having to be protected from insurgents attacking their barracks and training camps any time day or night, and 2, trainers are much more unlikely to become targets themselves. Thus, not only can the trainers and trainers get on with the job at hand, they are far less likely to be preoccupied and stressed.
I have also read recently (sorry, can’t trace the source) that it is much easier to build up a tight esprit de corp among the trainees when they are not constantly being torn between their comrades in arms and their tribal compatriots or, by sectarian loyalties, and far less likely to have the opportunity to offload their newly acquired weapons - which makes an awful lot of sense to me.
However, Baghdad Billy was having none of it, ‘what would a mere Colonel know?’ ‘They’re ten a penny in the US Army’, ‘And we all know about the French, don’t we?’, nudge nudge, wink wink.
Oh. dear, as I’ve said before, this is going to be a looooong, looooong year. Groan.
February 21st, 2007 at 1:41 pm
As noted by Herindoors, the “Rudd is a flip-flopper” talking point has certainly been taken for a walk this week by Howard and his Ministers.
Great new campaign strategy chaps. Bet you paid Textor/Crosby a fortune for that one.
In fact, it comes straight out of the Republican songbook for the 2004 presidential election, where Kerry was demonised coast to coast as a flip-flopper whenever he opened his mouth to speak.
The trouble is, Howard and his Ministers are simply not able to make the case that Rudd is flip-flopping, and sound increasingly silly in the face of the evidence.
Rudd is square-shouldered and determined about everything he announces, pugnacious and effective in debate, and looks nothing like a waffly fence-sitter. He also manages to do nuance quite well, when necessary.
I mean, how stupid does Howard think we all are? I think Rudd has really messed with his head.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Well he has been elected four times …
February 21st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Thanks Grace for pointing out that the ‘walking both sides of the street’ and ‘each way bet Kevin’ (Howard, this am) discourse comes right out of the ‘Republican songbook, 2004′ script.
Yet we still get an ABC political journalist on Radio National this morning confirm, following a leading question by the host, that yes, Howard had picked this up from Australian focus group fears about Ruddy. Later, such opinion to be reconfirmed by a SMH political journalist, Philip Coorey, when he was asked the same question by Matt Abraham on ABC Local Radio 891. To add further weight to his belief, Coorey referred to the sms from a listener yesterday on 891 accusing Rudd of being a ‘flip flopper’. Isn’t there the remotest chance of a Liberal staffer sms-ing radio stations to push the current party line? Yet nobody in the media seems to be game to even suggest such a gambit.
Unlike Avuncular Joe who was accusing just about everyone, that they were a Labor party hack or a union stooge the previous day (891), when they rang in on talkback and attempted to gainsay his smooze re: WorkChoices.
Yes indeed, a long, long, hot summer and equally long, cold winter. Ruddy, please keep your head.