On the whole, the British Army seems to have been more successful than the Americans in avoiding obvious cultural friction. Most important has probably been an unwillingness to open fire in all directions when a shot is fired at them. In Amarah, a peculiarly tough town that even Saddam Hussein found difficult to subdue, a British unit came under prolonged bombardment by mortars last year without responding. This is very different from Baghdad, where every Iraqi, both Sunni and Shia, has a story of a friend or relative killed by American troops....But then see this, also from The Independent: Under fire: British soldiers attacked in Basra
Ever since the invasion was first launched, both the American and the British military have tended to underestimate the gut dislike by Arab Iraqis - Shia as well as Sunni - of foreign occupation forces in their homeland. This may be stronger among the Sunni but Shia are often equally nationalistic. The difference is the Shia want to gain power first through elections. The Kurds are the only community within Iraq's borders genuinely enamoured of the American presence....
The fragile understanding between the British army and local powers may well continue. But at some point the relationship between the two could break down and the cities and towns be engulfed by the same violence as is seen further north.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Fragile British authority in Iraq
Patrick Cockburn, in The Independent:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment