Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Churchill on When to Throw in the Towel on Iraq

Glenn Greenwald once remarked that "the highest achievement to which one can aspire in the neocon universe it to be compared to Winston Churchill."

So Churchill would advocate another surge and toughing it out forever in Iraq, right? Here is what he wrote in 1922, a couple of years after Britain was awarded Iraq by the Versailles Treaty as a 'mandate' (i.e. colony). [Britain was forced out as mandatory power in Iraq in 1932, when it became an independent country, though of course it was influential until 1958.]


"Winston S. Churchill to David Lloyd George (Churchill papers: 17/27) 1 September 1922

I am deeply concerned about Iraq. The task you have given me is becoming really impossible. Our forces are reduced now to very slender proportions. The Turkish menace has got worse; Feisal is playing the fool, if not the knave; his incompetent Arab officials are disturbing some of the provinces and failing to collect the revenue; we overpaid £200,000 on last year's account which it is almost certain Iraq will not be able to pay this year, thus entailing a Supplementary Estimate in regard to a matter never sanctioned by Parliament; a further deficit, in spite of large economies, is nearly certain this year on the civil expenses owing to the drop in the revenue. I have had to maintain British troops at Mosul all through the year in consequence of the Angora quarrel: this has upset the programme of reliefs and will certainly lead to further expenditure beyond the provision I cannot at this moment withdraw these troops without practically inviting the Turks to come in. The small column which is operating in the Rania district inside our border against the Turkish raiders and Kurdish sympathisers is a source of constant anxiety to me.

I do not see what political strength there is to face a disaster of any kind, and certainly I cannot believe that in any circumstances any large reinforcements would be sent from here or from India. There is scarcely a single newspaper - Tory, Liberal or Labour - which is not consistently hostile to our remaining in this country. The enormous reductions which have been effected have brought no goodwill, and any alternative Government that might be formed here - Labour, Die-hard or Wee Free - would gain popularity by ordering instant evacuation. Moreover in my own heart I do not see what we are getting out of it. Owing to the difficulties with America, no progress has been made in developing the oil. Altogether I am getting to the end of my resources.

I think we should now put definitely, not only to Feisal but to the Constituent Assembly, the position that unless they beg us to stay and to stay on our own terms in regard to efficient control, we shall actually evacuate before the close of the financial year. I would put this issue in the most brutal way, and if they are not prepared to urge us to stay and to co-operate in every manner I would actually clear out. That at any rate would be a solution. Whether we should clear out of the country altogether or hold on to a portion of the Basra vilayet is a minor issue requiring a special study. It is quite possible, however, that face to face with this ultimatum the King, and still more the Constituent Assembly, will implore us to remain. If they

Page 2

do, shall we not be obliged to remain? If we remain, shall we not be answerable for defending their frontier? How are we to do this if the Turk comes in? We have no force whatever that can resist any serious inroad. The War Office, of course, have played for safety throughout and are ready to say 'I told you so' at the first misfortune.

Surveying all the above, I think I must ask you for definite guidance at this stage as to what you wish and what you are prepared to do. The victories of the Turks will increase our difficulties throughout the Mohammedan world. At present we are paying eight millions a year for the privilege of living on an ungrateful volcano out of which we are in no circumstances to get anything worth having."

From Martin Gilbert, WINSTON S. CHURCHILL IV, Companion Volume Part 3, London: Heinemann, 1977, pp. 1973-74.

From: This web site, winstonchurchill.org.

Labels:

8 Comments:

At 3:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Despite Churchill's judgement Britain did stay on, officially until the 1941 coup, and in effect until 1958.

The other point is: real politics is more about presentation than substance. You must agree at least that President Bush's oratory and the owe he inspires are at least on a par with those of Churchill.

 
At 6:47 AM, Blogger Tom said...

I do often wonder if there are several different Churchills - the other one not spoken of in neocon-supporting circles is the one who advocated internationally-enforced human rights standards through the UN and particularly the Council of Europe, which lead to the European Convention on Human Right.

These are constant thorns in the sides of would-be authoritarians, particularly in investigating renditions in Eastern Europe and in protecting the rights of terrorist suspects in the UK to a fair trial and prohibiting arbitrary detention and the desire for politicians to indulge in executive action above the law. Good old Winston, still protecting our way of life, n' all that, even 42 years dead.

There's also the Churchill who spent his entire career as a stalwart supporter of parliamentary democracy and the importance of debate and oversight in protecting individual liberty. He doesn't get too much coverage these days, either.

 
At 7:05 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Concerning conflict in Iraq—


“How much longer are valuable lives to be sacrificed in the vain endeavour to impose upon the Arab population an elaborate and expensive administration which they never asked for and do not want?”

Source: The Times of London

Date: August 7, 1920


Now, in 2007, after the loss of an uncountable number of additional lives, the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars, and the lapse of 87 years, the question remains unanswered.

My source: David Fromkin's "A Peace to End all Peace," p. 452

 
At 12:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

President Bush's oratory and the owe he inspires are at least on a par with those of Churchill.

Oh yes, my friend, Bush has inspired a lot of "owe". We're are in debt up to our good ol' American tuchas thanks to George.

 
At 3:03 PM, Blogger John Koch said...

Bush is quite Churchillian! The adventure in Iraq shares the same poor planning and hubris that inspired the Gallipoli disaster. Churchill's keen plan to invade the Axis via the Balkans displayed similar bold idiocy that hagiographers chose not to emphasize.

Churchill's PR people were wise enough to use an impersonator to deliver some of the grand bibbler's more famous WWII radio orations. Who in today's broadcast world might qualify to mimic our Bible-er Decider's unforgetable Saturday radio addresses?

 
At 6:14 AM, Blogger Stonker said...

"You must agree at least that President Bush's oratory and the owe he inspires are at least on a par with those of Churchill."

I cried with laughter as I read the words.

Churchill's determination, intelligence and strength of character, expressed through carefully crafted speeches delivered to his nation and to the world, inspired the dogged and successful defiance by the British, of a genuine threat to British national survival, and to the survival of democracy in western Europe. Hitler - eventually - made it possible for a benevolently self-interested America to intervene against him, and contribute to the defeat he had wished upon Germany through his near simultaneous provocation of both Russia and the USA. America's greatest gain was the end of the British empire as a trade competitor: and end which Roosevelt and Truman actively pursued as a matter of policy.

The illogical and incoherent ramblings of the incumbent US President will be long forgotten before he has left his current post. The enduring memory of his time in office will be of folly and incompetence.

Churchill's speeches (regardless of Britain's post-war humbling, and despite Churchill's own personal character flaws)will continue to be read long after Dubya is dead and buried.

Churchill was recently voted "The Greatest British Person In History".

What chance of Little George Dubya supplanting Abraham Lincoln as "Greatest American", in his own country, let alone in the world at large?

Maj P A Sturtivant (UK Army - ret'd)

 
At 1:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Cole,

We have composed a reply to your essay on our blog(www.churchillsparrot.com)entitled "Caution: Lefty Logic May Prove Fatal" - posted 31, August, 2007. We invite you, as well as your readers, to take a look see.

Cheers,

Charlie
www.churchillsparrot.com

 
At 3:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it too late to point out that the "conservative" part of neo-con might be said to be inapplicable to Churchill in the 1920's? He was serving in a Liberal Government at the time--David LLoyd-George (a lifelong Churchill political ally) - the Prime Minister he is addressing- was a Welsh Liberal, often regarded as the founding father of the British Labour Party.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home