Lloyd Evans, The Spectator’s theatre critic, reviews last night’s Spectator / Intelligence Squared debate on the future of Iraq which featured Tony Benn, William Shawcross, Sir Christopher Meyer, Ali Allawi, Rory Stewart and Lt Peter Hegseth.
Full audio of the debate is available here.
The Future of Iraq
Speakers and motions
Proposition 1
Go. ‘Allied forces should leave Iraq as soon as is practical’
Rt Hon Tony Benn
Rory Stewart
Proposition 2
Quid pro Quo. ‘A withdrawal of troops as part of a negotiated settlement on the future of Iraq’
Sir Christopher Meyer
Dr Ali Allawi
Proposition 3
Stay. ‘The Surge is working. Let’s win before we leave.’
William Shawcross
Lt Peter Hegseth
Led Zep, eat your heart out. Iraq was the biggest pull this week. The final Intelligence Squared debate of the year was staged in Westminster Methodist Hall where more than three thousand punters thrust their way in to hear an all-star panel. The presentation was a bit glam-rock too. A huge Iraqi flag was draped melodramatically across the podium and the motion was as expansive and flared as the issue. Three pairs of speakers proposed a trio of propositions. To quit Iraq now, to mount a negotiated withdrawal or to leave only after we’ve won. Tony Benn, favouring an immediate pull-out, affirmed his belief in the UN as the arbiter of international law. ‘Iraq is like Vietnam,’ he said, ‘an unwinnable war’. Displaying his preference for seductive imagery over convincing argument he added that ‘the Statue of Liberty has moved to Guantanamo Bay.’ His aside that ‘there’s no difference between a suicide bomber and a Stealth bomber’ got him into trouble later on. Christopher Meyer, former British ambassador to Washington, proposed a phased withdrawal and called for a ‘diplomatic surge.’ This had to involve Iran which is ‘too big a player to be shunned.’ Asked by chairman Andrew Neil when the disengagement should begin, Meyer shrugged nonchalantly. ‘Haven’t a clue’. ‘And there,’ said Neil, ‘speaks the British Foreign Office.’ Meyer explained that the withdrawal was so complex that it would have to be effected in careful stages.
William Shawcross, derided by the left as a blinkered war-monger, came across as an eloquent and manifestly decent man. He reminded us of Al Qaeda’s true nature: ‘A murderous international conspiracy seeking to enslave Shias, Jews and Christians and, let’s not forget, to hang gays from cranes.’ He admitted that the invasion had been ill-prepared but despite ‘fantastic mistakes’ the future was full of hope. The Iraqi dinar is rising, trade is booming. Refugees are returning at the rate of a thousand a day. But he opposed a timetable for withdrawal, quoting the baleful example of the British exit from India.
Rory Stewart, once a deputy governor in the provinces of Maysan and Dhi Qar, urged a swift exit from Iraq. ‘Embarrassment rather than good policy is now leading our engagement.’ His sincerity and his charm came across very powerfully and he told us a salutary tale. In 2004 his compound had been under constant attack, receiving 100 incoming mortars a day. The nearby Italian force, 20 minutes away, usually took at least seven hours to arrive with reinforcements. After a year’s absence he returned and found everything transformed. The area was completely pacified thanks to the Italians. But it wasn’t their ‘good intentions’ that had done the trick but ‘their cowardice and incompetence’. This had forced the Iraqis to assume control. His funny, modest and disarming speech attracted grateful waves of applause. Andrew Neil responded by pointing towards the back of the hall. ‘The Italian ambassador and his bodyguards are waiting for you there. And they’re experts in special rendition.’
Dr Ali Allawi, a former member of Interim Iraq Governing Council, had resigned himself to realpolitik. The invasion has changed Iraq permanently, he said, and the new reckoning must reflect this. The Shia majority (80 %) will not relinquish their dominance. Autocracy is unthinkable. US engagement is vital. The hopes of Kurdish nationalism must be accommodated. And a peace conference will have to be convened with the authority to create a final settlement.
Speaking in favour of the US surge, Lt Peter Hegseth told us that American military attitudes have been transformed. ‘They’ve taken the forces out of the bases, out of the Burger Kings, and put them out there among the people’. This has produced rich dividends. ‘Trust, co-operation and the crown jewel – intelligence.’
Lively exchanges followed from the floor. Gravel-voiced General Sir Michael Jackson condemned Tony Benn’s attempt to ‘equate suicide bombers with coalition aircrew.’ He found this ‘extraordinary and obscene. A calumny.’ Huge applause. Benn responded by recalling the early 1940s when he’d seen the nearby streets of Westminster strewn with civilians killed by the Luftwaffe. Was there any difference between the victims of state armies and those of individual terrorists? ‘War is the terrorism of the rich against the poor,’ said Benn. ‘Terrorism is the war of the poor against the rich.’ Many applauded. Many were unimpressed.
There was a vote before and after the debate. The ‘quit now’ camp lost easily (535 votes before and 630 after) but it wasn’t quite clear who had won. The ‘staged withdrawal’ supporters emerged with the most votes (704 before the debate and 806 after) but their percentage increased by only 11% whereas the ‘pro-surge’ lobby (moving from 434 to 668) increased by 32 %. Decide for yourself by watching the debate on BBC Parliament 9 pm, Saturday 15th December. International viewers can tune in to BBC World during the weekend of 5/6 January 2008.
Comments