Iraq and Afghanistan - Why Did We Bother?

Our dear friend Ahmad Jad can't help cracking jokes. He says that the current leak of classified US documents to Wkileaks is "American psychological warfare" ( he must get a new gag writer, but he ignores my advice).
He's joking , of course. These leaks are a huge embarrasment to the US government and its allies. The US Government will have to make huge efforts to limit the damage. There is much to concern us, such as the indication that the Saudi rulers wanted the USA to attack Iran. There will be cause for amusement, such as Prince Andrew's reported gaffes.
 For me though, I'm very interested in the criticism of our armed forces in Afghanistan. As the BBC put it, there was:
"Criticism of UK operations in Afghanistan by US commanders, Afghan president Hamid Karzai and officials in Helmand, particularly around the failure to impose security around Sangin".
It should be remembered here that US commentators, military and civil, were equally critical of UK forces in Iraq and their handling of the situation in Basra.
So, hundreds of UK service personnel have died, several thousand wounded and many more will carry battle trauma ("wounds inside the head") for years to come. All for a disparaging verdict on their efforts by our principal ally. Am I alone in wondering - why did we bother?
This is not to imply any criticism of the American people, who are as sick of this useless war as we are.

Exit Strategies Compared - NATO and Taliban

Guardsman Christopher Davies, a 22 year old father of one, who was alive this time last week, has achieved an unenviable distinction. Last Wednesday, he became the 100th British soldier to die in Afghanistan this year and the latest of 645 NATO troops to suffer death in battle in 2010. His family and his comrades speak highly of him. He leaves a young daughter, Lucy. His 21 year old brother, John, is serving in the same regiment - the Irish Guards.Liam Fox, the Defence Secretary, has said that Guardsman Davies' sacrifice will not be forgotten. Well, there's a comfort.
   This tragic event comes at a time when NATO is debating when (and how) to quit Afghanistan. No-one is making the mistake that George Bush made in Iraq - boasting "Mission accomplished!". Everyone knows that it isn't. From what I have read, it seems that the Taliban controls about half of the country. While NATO troops are tied down in the South, the Taliban are active in the North of Afghanistan. Unlike the NATO commanders, they have not forgotten the teachings of Sun Tzu and Mao-Tse Tung.
Another forgotten fact is that, after 9/11, we would not have invaded Afghanistan had the Taliban handed over Osama Bin Laden. So much for our honourable crusade. If they had delivered Bin Laden, "The Talibs" would have been left alone to rule Afghanistan in their own inimitable fashion. Anyway, NATO leaders are thrashing out an exit strategy. The Taliban, of course, have their own exit strategy - death or victory. It remains to be seen which of the two exit strategies is the more successful.

Students Lead the Fight-Back?

I'd given up on the students of today. I'd come to think of them as conservative, politically apathetic and mindful only of their future job prospects. I compared them unfavourably to the students of the 60s and 70s, who had campaigned and marched in tens of thousands against the Viet-Nam War, Apartheid and the National Front. Today's students were, I concluded, just plain boring. Last Wednesday's events have caused me to reconsider this unkind verdict. As John Harris comments in today's Guardian :
"What happened on Wednesday afternoon was not some meaningless rent-a-mob flare-up, nor an easily-ignored howl of indignation from some of society's more privileged citizens. It was an early sign of people growing anxious and restless, and what a government pledged to such drastic plans should increasingly expect."
The mass media, of course (and for other reasons, myself) concentrated upon the actions of a violent minority. More relevant, I think, is the fact that tens of thousands of young people have woken up to the fact that public spending cuts are going to seriously endanger their futures. Many other sectors of society are also becoming aware of the devastating consequences of these cost-cutting measures and are beginning to take action. Our Welfare State itself is threatened - and if the government have their way, will be permanently dismantled. Harris quotes David Cameron in a speech made on August 2nd, in Birmingham:
"Should we cut things now and go back later and try and restore them later? I think we should be trying to avoid that approach"
In other words - what gets cut, will never be replaced. Harris goes on to comment that banker's bonuses have been replaced. On November 9th, Barclays announced that £1.6 billion was in their bonus pot.
If, as I hope, students, pensioners, trade unionists, community groups and others likely to be affected by the cuts unite to resist them, then the government can expect many more demonstrations like that seen in London last Wednesday.

Propaganda by Deed and Today's Students' Protest

The TV news broadcasts, and the rest of the media, are buzzing with the way today's student protest against tuition fees turned violent. The Metropolitan Police are very embarrassed about the fact that their preparations were inadequate, and the Millbank Building will need considerable redecoration. Much as I deplore the violence, I regard the events at Millbank as an example of what I referred to in my previous post - Propaganda by Deed (PBD). The style of the attack today is very similar to that seen during the "Stop the City" demos. This takes the form of attacking symbols and properties, rather than people - despite serious scuffling, the demonstators concentrated their destructive efforts on the Millbank Building itself, rather than the small number of beleagured police trying to defend it. This, together with the fact that the protesters who made it to the rooftop waved Anarchist flags (strictly speaking, Anarcho-Syndicalist flags, the Anarchist flag is black) leads me to think that the violent minority (or the revolutionary vanguard, depending upon your point of view) were Anarchists, engaged in PBD. I have no doubt that, when arrested demonstrators appear in court, we will find that many are members of Class War and similar organisations.
As a one-time student radical (well, I thought I was) who went to University when grants were available, I do sympathise with how students feel about the rise in tuition fees. I anticipate that less and less working class students will go to University, and this country will be the poorer for it - as we were before the advent of the now-disappearing Welfare State.
However, I think that today's PBD will be counter-productive, as it will only alienate public support from the student cause. It's one thing to protest against the actions of the state with PBD, but the state, the media and public opinion will only retaliate with far more effective propaganda AND deeds.

Al Qaeda and the Anarchists - Propaganda by Deed?

Ever since 9/11, I have taken an active interest in Jihadism generally, and the tactics of Al-Qaeda in particular.  I knew that Al Qaeda's tactics would have to evolve following the attacks in the USA, and thought I could predict how they would develop new methods of seeking to inflict terror on their chosen targets. Although they moved with what I thought of as bewildering slowness, all my fears have been realised - and there's more to come.
After 9/11, the resultant security crackdown at airports, plus the increased Intelligence effort against them, made it difficult to repeat the outrage (although they didn't stop trying). Obviously, then, the terrorists eventually (as I expected) decided to mount indiscriminate bomb attacks. This led to the atrocities of 7/7 and the Madrid train bombing.
The authorities everywhere reacted by making it more difficult to obtain bomb-making materials. I thought that, unless Al-Qaeda and friends were stupid, they would switch to using firearms, which are cheaper (the 7/7 bombers spent £3000 making their murderous bombs), smaller and easier to conceal. They were not stupid, and the Mumbai Massacre happened.
To bring matters up to date, I believe that we have recently seen a new development in Jihadist tactics. The case of Roshonara Choudhry, the 21 year old woman jailed for stabbing Stephen Tibbs MP, indicates (to me, at least) that Al-Qaeda are moving towards the tactic supposedly developed by 19th century Anarchists - "Propaganda by Deed". I say "supposedly", because anarchists totally condemn both the tactics and beliefs of Al-Qaeda - See Here. I have no doubt that Jihadists loathe Anarchism just as much, but "Propaganda by Deed"(PBD) will hold certain attractions for Al-Qaeda.
Briefly, PBD means that individuals who support a radical cause should take violent actions against real (or imaginary) enemies when they are so minded, and have the opportunity. In the 19th century, some anarchists did carry out such attacks, often "inspired" by police provocateurs. One such example was the Walsall Bomb Plot of 1892. Even at the time, most anarchists condemned such outrages, and even the perpetrators tried not to harm the innocent.
Al-Qaeda will observe no such niceties. Already, an Islamist website has published details of MPs' surgery times - and where to buy knives to carry out attacks. I hope I am wrong, but I anticipate that Al-Qaeda will move towards more such small scale attacks, less "spectacular", but every bit as lethal. I also think that their range of targets will grow wider in time. Like I said, let's hope I'm wrong.