April 29, 2004
Spanish Withdrawal
In a previous post I suggested that the Madrid bombing and Socialist victory in the immediately following election was a victory for Al Qaeda because it allows them to plausibly claim to have enough power to change the outcome of Western elections. (Notice how the ‘plausibly claim’ lets us avoid getting into the hair-splitting and possibly impossible task of proving or disproving that claim). At the time Zapatero announced that he would order the withdrawal of Spanish troops in June unless a UN force took over.
I suggested that given that stance, Al-Qaeda was able to claim that it strongly (and from their point of view, positively) changed a Western country's foreign policy. At the time many readers suggested that this wouldn't be appeasement if Spain took strong steps elsewhere.
Which brings us to the present . Zapatero is now withdrawing the 1,400 troops immediately. He is no longer willing to wait for the UN. I suspect he isn't willing to wait, because the US is dealing with the UN and he needs to get the troops out before there is any chance of a UN resolution which might have fulfilled his stated position of leaving the troops in under UN auspices. His willingness to continue the war against even Al-Qaeda seems suspect despite his willingness to double the number of troops in Afghanistan. This is because it sounds impressive until you realize that Spain has 125 troops in Afghanistan now. Doubling to 250 is pathetic. That certainly doesn't signal to Al Qaeda that Spain is still serious about the war on terrorism. In fact it seems to do quite the opposite. And I note--again--that Afghanistan is supposedly the case where all of Europe agrees that the battle ought to be joined.
I also note that Bin Laden or whoever is impersonating his voice has offered the nations of Europe a truce if they withdraw from the Middle East. The window of opportunity for the truce was put at three months.
So, in short, the Spanish actions are much more plausibly appeasement than they were even when the Socialist Party originally made announcements when they won. Al Qaeda has more evidence for those in the Middle East who might be on the fence that the West has a glass jaw--just kill a bunch of civilians and the Muslim victory is at hand.
Posted by Sebastian Holsclaw at April 29, 2004 02:59 AMWhile I agree that the Spanish position is de facto apeasement,the problem initiated with a poor strategy on the part of the U.S.
We may well yet withdraw from Iraq. This is why there were comparisons made to Vietnam. There is not going to be a military solution to this problem. It is a political problem. The Occupation of Iraq IS the problem now.
Al Qaeda and Osama are not stupid. They are making political play of the Neocons strategy.
Al Qaeda are corrupt thugs seeking power and tyranny. They are not a national government however. They are using the thuggish and imperialistic view that we have some right to impose ourselves where we are not invited. I believe George H. W. Bush may have made a mistake in the Gulf War not to seek the overthrow of Sadam more aggressively. He stated then that he would have lost the coalition. Perhaps he was right,but the opportunity then existed more than ever to remove Sadam. The forces neccessary to provide a smoother transistion were there then.
G.W.Bush has made an error by being the aggressor. He holds no rational to advance his cause except the rantings of the Neocons, whose strategy seem more about suporting Israel than about advancing the U.S. interests.
Retreating to rational policy while perhaps appearing to cede a victory to Anti American causes, may in the long run work to our advantage.
Al Qaeda offers nothing but chaos and tyranny to the region. Removing their source of politcal power (American interference in internal Arab politics) may result in a turn in the Arab world.
The inescapable fact is the SP ran on a platform of disengaging from the shambolic mess that is the War in Iraq, a war that was massively unpopular in Spain. The PP then lied and tried to play politics with the Madrid massacre, and as a result paid the price at the ballot box. That’s democracy for you.
The call of appeasement has nice historical resonances for the right when aimed at the European left, but the Spanish people/their elected government can hardly be blamed if they want to have nothing to do with Bush’s occupation of an Islamic state that had nothing to do with what happened on 9/11.
Any vicotries Al Qaeda have been handed have not come from Spain, but from the ineptitude of the Bush administration. If you wage a war without popular support or a plausible motive, then it was always a distinct possibility that the coalition of desperation, would melt in the heat of an Iraqi battlefield.
Posted by: Bob Hope at April 29, 2004 08:00 AMFirst, leaving Iraq is not appeasement since they intended to do so anyway and Iraq has never had any connection with bin Laden or Al Quaida.
Second, what’s wrong with their troop levels in Afghanistan doubling, exactly? It might be only a symbolic gesture, but given that we’ve supposedly already won in Afghanistan and are not trying to occupy that country how many troops are really needed there? It’s not like the Taliban is still running things… we put a new government in charge, remember?
Finally, maybe they have good reason to be backing away from the Iraq debacle. Recent news reports aren’t painting the american occupation in a very flattering light. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/27/60II/main614063.shtml
Posted by: Jarin at April 29, 2004 10:06 AM“Second, what’s wrong with their troop levels in Afghanistan doubling, exactly?”
What is wrong with turning a pathetic 125 troops into a sad 250? Nothing, I suppose. What would be wrong is pretending that showed any particularly strong commitment.
Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at April 29, 2004 11:28 AMConsidering Canada, a much larger nation, is presently reducing its troops there to 800, I don’t see 250 as being all that sad or pathetic a contribution from Spain. http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/04/14/afghan_troops040414
Posted by: Jarin at April 29, 2004 11:46 AM> What is wrong with turning a pathetic 125
> troops into a sad 250?
Just because Spain’s numbers are pathetic doesn’t mean that the Bush administration’s commitment to the war against Al Qaeda isn’t even more pathetic.
The US military presence in Iraq is ten times the size of our military presence in the Afghanistan theater (Operation Enduring Freedom)..
Even before the Spanish pullout from Iraq, Spain’s commitment to Iraq was only about five times that of her commitment to Afghanistan.
Thus, Spain’s Iraq-to-Afghanistan ratio has always been a hell of a lot better than ours. Still, I think both Spain and the US and everyone else should be more committed to the Afghan battle. The only way that’s gonna happen will be through strong and focused US leadership - we are the only country capable of (and with the greatest responsibility of) leading such a mission.
-Cf
His willingness to continue the war against even Al-Qaeda seems suspect despite his willingness to double the number of troops in Afghanistan.
Hmm… I seem to read about Spain capturing batches of al Qaeda operatives every week. Doesn’t that count? How many al Qaeda operatives have we caught in Iraq recently?
