Fallujah to Palestine and back

The so-called Anglo-American relationship is fraught with all the tensions of a problematic marriage. Both countries lied their way into the Iraq war. But the British, driven by the Americans, leapt into the fire brandishing a secret Anglo-American understanding. The Iraq adventure would be saleable only if sufficient and tangible progress were made on the Israeli-Palestinian track — the Middle East peace process.

The British may be keeping a straight face but there is deep disappointment among policymakers at the Americans having reneged on this understanding. The consequent choreography has been disastrous: Helicopter gunships, tanks, bombers have been devastating Iraq with as much impunity as the Israelis have been bulldozing Gaza, both confronted by desperate suicide bombers. This is the image telecast on world, including Arab, TV sets. Turkey’s foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, is not the only world leader flailing his arms and screaming: “Please stop the Fallujah operations.”

Arafat’s departure offers an opportunity, possibly a cleaner slate, to pick up the thread on the mid-East process. But former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook has warned that “Bush will celebrate his victory by torching Fallujah.”

The point I am making is this: Supposing this dramatically new situation on the Israeli-Palestine track had presented itself when the Fallujah operations were still on the drawing boards, would these plans have been postponed for the choreographers to introduce some “humaneness” into the proceedings by facilitating footage on the peace process, ahead of the Fallujah operations? It certainly would have softened the impact of Iraqis and Palestinians being clobbered at the same time, a sort of double fisted one-two (to borrow a boxing expression) on the Arab chin.

The British actually had a difficult time last week doing damage control. The death of three soldiers of the Scottish Regiment Black Watch, posted to troubled Baghdad from Basra, sparked an anti-war outburst from the media to the speaker’s corner at Hyde Park. The spin doctors did quite well to ride out the anger at the death of the three soldiers, young and handsome like picture postcards. They focused on Fallujah by deftly bypassing military officers at the ministry of defence clearing their throats for the briefing.

Why should they do the briefing when British regiments were not involved in the Fallujah operations? Indeed, the trick was to advertise the military action as one ordered by interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and spearheaded by Iraqi troops. It was to be dressed up as part of the indigenous Iraqi yearning for democratic elections in January. The rebels in Fallujah were standing in the way of democracy and Iraqi troops, at Allawi’s behest, were spearheading the assault to remove the obstacle. This was the script cleared by the spin doctors in Washington and London.

Allawi obliged by standing in front of the cameras on the set especially designed for press briefings in the world’s most securely fortified area called the Green Zone in Baghdad. There was the Freudian slip when he announced he had ordered multinational troops to attack rebel strongholds in Fallujah. Even as Lakhdar Brahimi, who alternates between being a UN representative and a freelance facilitator, leered at Allawi, the interim premier introduced suitable amendments. “I have ordered Iraqi troops to clear Fallujah of rebels.” He added that these valiant Iraqi troops will be assisted by the multinational forces.

Anchors and embedded reporters were requested to mention the Iraqi component in the military action, and Iyad Allawi, at suitable intervals in their commentary. In the national interest and that of the Iraqi people, the TV journalists have obliged.

The British are still wringing their hands that something should have been done in Palestine simultaneously, but there is the overriding concern that picking up the mid-East peace process, in the post-Arafat scenario, would delay Iraq’s January elections.

Why is the January date for elections set in stone? Because the Shia leaders in the south (and the Kurds) believe the only exit strategy for the Americans is to swiftly hold elections. If elections are not held in January, the Najaf clergy will not be able to control public wrath.

But for that distant stage to be reached Fallujah has first to be controlled. After it has been controlled will follow stories of atrocities inside the city and the known and unknown weapons used. And then the backlash, across the country?

New Delhi must watch the situation before responding to requests to nominate a distinguished person to head the body that will manage Iraq elections.