Liberal Democrats on iraq

Liberal Democrats on Iraq

Firstly I must and cannot stress enough to you how strongly the Liberal Democrats opposed the Government's decision to go to war in Iraq.

However by invading Iraq the government imposed on the UK a moral obligation to the Iraqi people to work towards a secure, stable and democratic Iraq. But our obligation cannot be open-ended. The UK Government should produce an exit strategy, including a plan for the phased withdrawal of UK troops by the end of the year.

The War

The war in Iraq is the biggest mistake that this Government has made. We were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction which were a threat, but the Iraq Survey Group has proved that this was not the case and that the policy of containment was working. If inspectors had been given more time, they would have concluded that no WMD existed and a war which has killed many thousands of people would have been avoided.

It is now clear that the issue of whether or not Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction was a smokescreen. Leaked government papers have shown that Tony Blair was committed to go to war with George Bush on the issue of regime change at least a year before the conflict, but he kept this secret from Parliament and the British people. The Prime Minister has never answered this charge.

The human and financial costs of the conflict have been enormous, the violence is unrelenting and the future of Iraq remains uncertain. In particular:

· Casualties
Over 1,500 coalition soldiers have been killed, including 86 British servicemen. Well over 15,000 Iraqi civilians have died, and thousands more injured – in military operations and the ensuing insurgency. (Figures correct to Feb 4th 2005.)

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

· Cost
the UK has already spent over £3 billion on the conflict and occupation, which could rise to as much £5 billion by the end of the year. US spending on Iraq have exceeded well over $100 billion and the total cost is expected to be over $200 billion.

· Security
whilst we have every hope that Iraq will have a more stable future, the January elections mark the beginning of a difficult process, not the end. There is severe and deadly rivalry for control of the state, and the violence is unabated.

· Terrorism
The conflict has not only ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

· Terrorism
The conflict has not only placed severe strain on international relations between the Muslim world and the West, but Iraq is now a crucible of militant terrorism. As our intelligence services warned prior to the conflict, it may have increased the international terrorist threat to the UK and other Western states.

· Humanitarian deprivation
Public services have been badly disrupted; thousands of Iraqis still experience serious shortages of food, water, sanitation, medicines, and electricity; and levels of unemployment remain high.

· Nuclear proliferation
Although Saddam had no WMD programme, since the war ended nuclear equipment has vanished in Iraq and the IAEA have warned it could lead to nuclear proliferation.

Holding the Government to account

In addition to voting against the decision to invade Iraq when the matter was put before Parliament, the Liberal Democrats have consistently sought to hold Tony Blair and his Government to account, before, during and since the war. Charles Kennedy has regularly tackled Tony Blair on Iraq at Prime Minister's Questions, and we have used several of our precious opposition day debates to force the Government to answer questions on their actions in Iraq and the poor and inadequate intelligence that has lain behind them. We have sought to ask hard questions and provide effective opposition to the war - speaking up for the many British people who were opposed to sending our troops to Iraq. This was in contrast to the Conservatives, who acted as cheerleaders for war, saying we should not allow a cigarette paper's width between the British and American positions.

We are continuing to challenge the Government on Iraq. Unprecedentedly, our amendment to the motion to approve the Queen's Speech (the Government's programme of legislation) in December 2004 focused on a single issue – the wide-ranging powers of prerogative that the British Prime Minister has over matters of war and peace. The Hutton and Butler Inquiries investigated aspects of the run-up to war, but neither of them examined the full political, legal and strategic advice given to the Prime Minister before the war, nor the Prime Minister's competence and judgment in the light of that advice. Parliament should have the powers to investigate these areas fully, to properly hold the Prime Minister to account.

It is clear that Iraq will be a significant factor at the general election. More than any report by a Judge, or questions in Parliament, the election offers the ultimate opportunity to hold Tony Blair and his Government to account for their shameful and illegal decision to invade Iraq.

Elections

We welcome the Transitional Assembly elections which are a genuine achievement. We salute of the courage of all Iraqis who participated and all those who worked to make it a success. A transition to a fully democratic government in Iraq is now the only possible course of action: extensive efforts must be made to support this process.

Exit strategy and troop withdrawal

By invading Iraq the government has imposed on the UK a moral obligation to the Iraqi people to work towards the achievement of a stable, secure and democratic Iraq. Our armed forces continue to fulfill this responsibility with great courage and skill.

However, we believe that the UK should now produce an exit strategy, which augments the democratic process, provides for Iraq’s security, and establishes the basis for the phased withdrawal of British troops by the end of 2005, as security conditions allow. There are compelling reasons for the objective of withdrawal by 2006:

· Security
The uncertainty of a completely open-ended commitment could do more harm than good. The presence of coalition forces, to some degree, fuels the insurgency; the longer our forces stay, the greater the danger that they will become part of the problem, and not the solution. Over the course of the year the concerted strengthening and enlargement of Iraqi security forces should enable them to assume responsibility for security.

· Sovereignty
the Iraqis now have a government with genuine legitimacy; and according to the UN timetable, elections for a fully representative government, on the basis of a new constitution, will take place in December. Overwhelmingly, the Iraqi people wish to see coalition forces leave in the near future – a call of echoed by virtually all the political parties that participated in the recent elections. Withdrawal of coalition forces would support and entrench the full restoration of sovereignty to the Iraqi people.

· Legality
The presence of coalition forces (MNF) in Iraq is authorised by UN Security Council Resolutions 1511 and 1546. The mandate is due to expire in December, more than two and half years after the invasion; any deployment beyond this time would be unlawful unless sanctioned by the Iraqi government or a new Security Council Resolution.

Priorities

The immediate priorities of the MNF and the new government should be to:

· Re-establish security, law and order, particularly in the Sunni provinces, primarily through strengthening Iraqi security forces.

· Affect a graduated transfer of responsibility for security from Multi-national to Iraqi forces.

· Encourage and support the involvement of representatives of all minorities - especially Sunnis - in Iraqi politics, at both national and local levels; ensure such groups have the opportunity to contribute to the framing of a constitution.

· Improve the delivery of public services; in particular to ensure adequate supplies of food, water, sanitation and electricity; and to address high levels of unemployment.