It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for North-East Hampshire (Mr. Arbuthnot). I am pleased to say that he was as excellent as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee as he is now, and he is of course much missed. We have heard some excellent contributions today. Both Front-Bench teams presented to the House a commonality of sentiment and a drive to persuade us that although we have achieved much so far, there is much more to achieve, and that we can do that and support it whenever the Iraqis should request it. It is also a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Dr. Howells) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Ann Clwyd). Both engaged the attention of the House and both were compassionate. They drove the idea that much has been achieved, and that there is much more to do.
For me, this is one of the most important debates that the House will enjoy—I hope that ““enjoy”” is the correct word to use. We are talking about Britain's future relationship with Iraq. Iraq could choose not to have a future strategic relationship with Britain, but we are all fairly clear, if not very clear, that it does wish to have such a relationship. In speaking about that relationship, I wish to concentrate on the central role that the British armed forces have played in Iraq over the past five years.
Before I begin that part of my speech, however, I hope that the House will tolerate my saying that, in 2003, I was very enthusiastic that we would deploy effectively in Iraq with the US and all other friends. I was confident and enthusiastic that we would get rid of a tyrant, that we would end up unshackling the Iraqis, that they would be pleased and purposeful and that they would soon see their way to establishing an institutional civil life that would be peaceful and secure. I believed that all that was possible. I am really sad to have to stand here today and say that, in large part, the Iraqis have suffered an awful time over the past five years. That is not just because of the sectarian hatred, the suicide bombers and the constant insurgency; it is because we have watched Iraqi against Iraqi, shockingly perpetrating the most appalling loss of life among children and the elderly, with their indiscriminate action against innocent people.
The assessment that I made was wrong. I am totally miserable that it should have been so wrong, but I am pleased that we are now beginning to see real signs of stability: a sovereign Government; the rule of law; the freedom of the press; and people feeling that they can be involved in their country and wanting to take up the responsibilities of being involved. The birth of Iraq's democratic state has been a journey, and it has seemed at times to be a very long one. It has been a journey of hope, then of tragedy, involving a savage disregard for human life, and now of hope again. This afternoon, I want to celebrate the deployment of the British armed forces in Iraq, and to look forward to their withdrawal. I am absolutely of the belief that the Iraqis, the British armed forces and the coalition have faced significant challenges, but they have also delivered significant achievements.
I have over a period watched and read the words of the Chief of the Defence Staff Sir Jock Stirrup, and those of General Sir Mike Jackson, while I have read the clear and careful analysis expressed in Defence Select Committee reports, particularly the June 2008 report on ““UK operations in Iraq and the Gulf””. That, along with all the other statements made by people in serious commanding roles within the armed forces, has persuaded us that, in their different ways, the armed forces have defined a significant change in Iraq—a change for the good. I acknowledge, as the chiefs have said, that now is probably the time for the armed forces to leave Iraq in the competent hands of the Iraqis.
From all that I have read, I believe that General Sir Mike Jackson has put forward the most convincing argument that the UK military's role is complete. He has made it clear on a number of occasions that there are still problems and conflicts but that they are non-military, so it is time that non-military Iraqi involvement became a fundamental part of the resolution. In exposition of current conflicts, he points to the fact that there are invariably conflicts between groups and between different parts of the Muslim world; in all honesty, I, too, believe implicitly that conflicts are inevitable. Frankly, the only way to resolve inter-group conflicts is through political institutions.
Iraq: Future Strategic Relationship
Proceeding contribution from
Dari Taylor
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 14 January 2009.
It occurred during Debate on Iraq: Future Strategic Relationship.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
486 c273-4 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 22:01:46 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_518359
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_518359
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_518359