|
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
News Search
|
|
19-01-2005 Scotsman Fears grow that outrage may cost lives and ruin elections By Gethin Chamberlain THE publication of pictures showing British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners is a devastating blow to the army's image. It threatens to undermine all the good work done by soldiers who have put their lives on the line trying to make post-war Iraq work; it shames those involved and those charged with ensuring they behaved as a dignified and compassionate force committed to replacing all that was wrong with Saddam's tyranny with all that should have been right about western democracy. The British army has won a reputation in southern Iraq for its low-key, non-confrontational style of peace-keeping. Commanders have taken pains to ensure that the men in their charge treat the local population with respect. Soldiers learn a little Arabic, they try to work with the local forces. That is why British forces have suffered less at the hands of insurgents. Ask Iraqis which army they would rather have on their streets, the British or American, and they will say the British. And now this. These pictures can only harm that hard-won reputation and cast doubt in the minds of some of the population about the soldiers who they had been prepared to tolerate. The images will be relayed around the Arab world. If these were British soldiers suffering at the hands of Iraqi guards, the howls of outrage and anger from this country would be deafening. Like the notorious images from Abu Ghraib, these will quickly turn up on posters. People will see them and look at the British soldiers in a new light. That much is inevitable. It can only be hoped that the violence such pictures could inspire is less inevitable. The court martial has come at the worst time for those hoping the Iraqi elections will pass off peacefully. There is less than two weeks until polling day. The concern among commanders on the ground is that British troops may now suffer a backlash, just as US forces did after the Abu Ghraib pictures. There has been a reluctance among those within the army to talk publicly about the pictures before they were presented to the court martial, but privately officers are aghast at the timing and the potential harm. "This is the very last thing that we could have wanted," one said. "Everything we have done, everything, is at risk here. "We have suffered our fair share of attacks already but when people see these it is going to make life very difficult. It will play into the hands of the minority who want us out and it will allow them to claim that this is in some way typical of British behaviour, which of course it is not." The pictures will also raise questions about Britain's handling of accusations against its own troops. The Ministry of Defence is now in a no-win situation: either it must explain how discipline was allowed to break down to such an extent, or it must concede that the abuse was part of a policy intended to soften up prisoners. It is inconceivable that it would admit to such a policy and General Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the British army, was yesterday quick to "condemn utterly" any abuse. Yet it must be said: the evidence of this abuse emerged only when a shop assistant in Tamworth looked at the pictures handed in to be developed. But this happened under the noses of senior officers: did they know what was going on and keep quiet? Were they unaware? Even before the publication of these pictures, it was widely acknowledged within the army that there had been incidents in which some soldiers, including officers, had overstepped the mark. Prisoners were assaulted and intimidated. Those involved - and there are some in the army who would support them - would argue that there has never been a golden era when prisoners were treated with kid gloves. They would say that soldiers who have recently been involved in fighting are not the best people to be placed in charge of those who they have been fighting, and who have been attempting to kill them. They would argue it is inevitable that soldiers will take out their frustrations on prisoners. But it is not an argument that will wash, within the army or in the wider world. Most soldiers will be angered by the actions of a minority who have tarnished the army's image. The danger now is that more lives will be lost as a direct result of these pictures, and that the election process, so vital to the future of Iraq, will be thrown into further turmoil. By behaving in this way, these men have put their comrades' lives in jeopardy, and sullied the organisation in which they serve.
|
|
||||
|
................................................................................................................. Copyright ©2004 Gethin Chamberlain. All rights reserved. |
|||||||
