The Falklands spirit
The fascinating drama-documentary on BBC Radio 4, which recalls the 1982 Falklands War and the political machinations surrounding it, presents an interesting contrast to the political situation today.
In 1982 Margaret Thatcher's unpopular Conservative government was faced with an act of naked aggression by the Argentine military junta in the form of the invasion of the Falkland Islands. Although international opinion was generally favourable towards British complaints, even elements of the Reagan administration were initially reluctant to intervene forcefully on our side.
In the end, Margaret Thatcher was faced with a stark decision: should the nation go to war to defend the life and liberty of two thousand Falkland Islanders? Was there a qualitative distinction to be drawn between Hitler's aggression and that of the Argentinian dictator Galtieri? And perhaps most crucially of all, did the British people have the stomach to fight for these fundamental principles in 1982 as they had done in 1940?
We all know the decision that the British government reached on that occasion, and the final outcome: that the Falkland Islanders were liberated, the territory retaken, and that a considerable number of lives were lost. Nevertheless, the fundamental principles of the defence of freedom, democracy and the rule of law were upheld.
Fast forward to 2007. The British government has just faced what amounts to a hostage crisis, with fifteen British sailors abducted by Iran in an act of piracy - in fact, an act of war. Those hostages, after facing torture and exploitation in contravention of the standards of the Geneva convention, have now been released and are at home with their families. No lives have been lost. The fundamental principles of the defence of freedom, democracy and the rule of law have not been upheld.
Whilst we are all naturally grateful that our service personnel have been safely returned, the fact remains that the UK has been humiliated. President Ahmedinejad seized the opportunity to stage a massive propaganda coup by releasing our men and women not because he is a religious, merciful man intent on bestowing gifts upon the British people at Eastertide, but because there was no advantage to Iran in keeping the hostages any longer. The judgement of the Iranians must have been that any further humiliation of the UK would be superfluous: by failing to rally effectively on our behalf, the European Union and the United Nations had already done the Iranians' work for them.
The message that the Iranians and any other enterprising putative kidnappers of British service men and women will have taken from this episode is as follows: If your band of kidnappers/pirates is sufficiently large and well armed then British soldiers will not fight back, and their comrades will not try to rescue them. And while the international community may condemn your actions it will not do so in particularly strong terms, and will certainly not take any measures which might cause you particular inconvenience.
Whatever the justification for the actions of our armed forces and the British government in this matter, it is imperative that hostage crises of this kind should not be allowed to recur. Rules of engagement must be changed such that British forces are authorised to defend themselves adequately, and they should be equipped so that they can defend themselves as forcefully as necessary. The softly, softly approach that may or may not have expedited the safe release of our hostages has also sent a dangerous signal to the Iranian government and terrorists everywhere. A new signal urgently needs to be sent: we were not seen as a soft touch in 1982; we must not be seen to be so now.
In 1982 Margaret Thatcher's unpopular Conservative government was faced with an act of naked aggression by the Argentine military junta in the form of the invasion of the Falkland Islands. Although international opinion was generally favourable towards British complaints, even elements of the Reagan administration were initially reluctant to intervene forcefully on our side.
In the end, Margaret Thatcher was faced with a stark decision: should the nation go to war to defend the life and liberty of two thousand Falkland Islanders? Was there a qualitative distinction to be drawn between Hitler's aggression and that of the Argentinian dictator Galtieri? And perhaps most crucially of all, did the British people have the stomach to fight for these fundamental principles in 1982 as they had done in 1940?
We all know the decision that the British government reached on that occasion, and the final outcome: that the Falkland Islanders were liberated, the territory retaken, and that a considerable number of lives were lost. Nevertheless, the fundamental principles of the defence of freedom, democracy and the rule of law were upheld.
Fast forward to 2007. The British government has just faced what amounts to a hostage crisis, with fifteen British sailors abducted by Iran in an act of piracy - in fact, an act of war. Those hostages, after facing torture and exploitation in contravention of the standards of the Geneva convention, have now been released and are at home with their families. No lives have been lost. The fundamental principles of the defence of freedom, democracy and the rule of law have not been upheld.
Whilst we are all naturally grateful that our service personnel have been safely returned, the fact remains that the UK has been humiliated. President Ahmedinejad seized the opportunity to stage a massive propaganda coup by releasing our men and women not because he is a religious, merciful man intent on bestowing gifts upon the British people at Eastertide, but because there was no advantage to Iran in keeping the hostages any longer. The judgement of the Iranians must have been that any further humiliation of the UK would be superfluous: by failing to rally effectively on our behalf, the European Union and the United Nations had already done the Iranians' work for them.
The message that the Iranians and any other enterprising putative kidnappers of British service men and women will have taken from this episode is as follows: If your band of kidnappers/pirates is sufficiently large and well armed then British soldiers will not fight back, and their comrades will not try to rescue them. And while the international community may condemn your actions it will not do so in particularly strong terms, and will certainly not take any measures which might cause you particular inconvenience.
Whatever the justification for the actions of our armed forces and the British government in this matter, it is imperative that hostage crises of this kind should not be allowed to recur. Rules of engagement must be changed such that British forces are authorised to defend themselves adequately, and they should be equipped so that they can defend themselves as forcefully as necessary. The softly, softly approach that may or may not have expedited the safe release of our hostages has also sent a dangerous signal to the Iranian government and terrorists everywhere. A new signal urgently needs to be sent: we were not seen as a soft touch in 1982; we must not be seen to be so now.
posted by Paul at 8:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home