Blair's Iraq Fantasy

Today, the truth about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction becomes clear. Even our political leaders have inadvertently admitted that if Iraq possessed such weapons, they should have been discovered by now. Evidence to the Hutton inquiry indicates that as far back as September, the British government knew their case was not convincing. Yet we went to war. Why?

The most commonly given explanation is that the invasion was for oil. Unfortunately, I don't buy it. The cost of the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq is currently estimated to be in excess of $100 billion. If control over sizeable oil reserves was the motive, a lot less money could have bought influence over a much wider region. Diplomatic bribes normally run to a few $100 millions, maybe a couple of $billion, dressed up as "aid" or "loans". Add in America's ability to give favourable trade agreements and political support, and America could have gained as much influence over the world oil markets for less expense.

Other logical explanations fall equally short. Humanitarian concerns are exceedingly suspect from governments that supported the murderous sanctions for so long, while doing nothing to end Hussein's well-publicised human rights abuses. The links between Hussein and international terrorism are so tenuous as to be effectively non-existent - Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Pakistan are all far more convincing targets than Iraq ever was. If anything, attacking Iraq has made Islamic terrorism more likely.

To explain the invasion of Iraq, we have to look elsewhere. Logic doesn't come into it. The reason for the invasion is hidden in Tony Blair's comment that "history will be my judge". Does this mean that Blair expects a group of argumentative and ignored academics to hold him accountable for any crimes he may have committed? Praise him for his virtues? Of course not. Blair's judge will be the "history" that teaches that the sinking Titanic was a tragic but minor incident in the love story of a spoilt heiress and a surprisingly clean cut Irish rogue; that all Roman soldiers dressed as if they were appearing in Asterix; and that William Wallace was a five foot two Australian. Blair wishes to be judged not by history, but by Hollywood.

There is an explanation that makes sense. Bush and Blair have caught themselves up in some High Noon fantasy. Hussein is clearly the bad guy, the anti-war protesters the naive fools who cannot be convinced of the real danger. Bush and Blair are the heroes of the film, righting wrongs with guns blazing. Its a common Hollywood story, and one that is perhaps appropriate for a world that lasts around two hours. In real life, the world is more complicated. No one gets to live happily ever after. We do need to worry about the consequences after the last reel finishes. And the extras who die don't get up and go home.

Iraq is a boy's own fantasy that is coming back to haunt the people trapped in it. For UK soldiers and Iraqi civilians alike, Blair's fantasy has a potentially fatal cost attached.

Graham Robinson. 20th August 2003.

Note - Today's other column appears in the Extras section.

archives :: links :: faq :: feedback

Find out how you can support Online Opinion

Online Opinion is a trademark owned by Graham Robinson. All rights reserved. The copyright on all articles, columns, and letters on this site is owned by the original author. The copyright on all other material is owned by Graham Robinson. Permission is granted to download and store these pages for personal or research purposes only, and only as is consistent with normal viewing of web pages. All other rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely link to any page within this site, as long as ownership of the material linked to is clear. No advertisements may be associated with this site, whether explicitly or implicitly, without prior written permission.