Misconceptions of occupation

By Abdallah El-Ashaal

---

As their last contingent packed up two weeks ago, the British left Basra in American hands. Soon after, the Iraqi president and the former UK chief of staff both waxed lyrical about the contribution British troops made in Iraq. The British fought for a free Iraq. They gave their blood to rid the country of Saddam Hussein, Jalal Talabani said. Back in the UK, the prime minister lavished praise on a mission well done.

In an interview with the BBC, Talabani reminisced about his life under Saddam, saying that he had to wage a guerrilla war from mountaintops against the Iraqi dictator. No one loves Saddam, but I have a word or two for Talabani.

Recently, the Kurdish president of Iraq delivered a speech at the UN. Did he deliver it in Arabic? No sir. The elected president of an Arab country delivered his speech in Kurdish, and an Arabic translation was distributed to the audience. Since he assumed the presidency, Talabani did everything within his power to help the Kurds break away from the central government.

The Iraqi president argued that the British brought freedom and human rights to the country and rehabilitated Iraqi forces. For the first time in history, the president of an occupied country thanks the occupiers. Also, Talabani said that the UN Security Council gave the coalition forces a mandate to liberate Iraq. To my knowledge, the UN Security Council cannot authorise occupation. It has once authorised a war to liberate Kuwait from occupation, but never a war of occupation.

The UN has never authorised the occupation of any other country in the world. The British people know that, and I trust that they also know that occupying Iraq was an ill-advised move and a sad throwback to colonialist times.

This week's Soapbox speaker is former assistant to the Egyptian foreign minister.