Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero says he plans to pull 1,300 Spanish troops out of Iraq in June.
Spain PM-elect: Troops out of Iraq
“I think Spain’s participation in the war has been a total error,” Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero told a news conference Monday.
Although I would have fully supported Spain’s decision not to send troops into Iraq, now that they are there, to simply pull them out without first guaranteeing that Iraq is ready to both govern and protect itself is a serious dereliction of duty. Essentially it says that nations with dictators can expect broken promises and a lack of support from Western countries that liberate them…that Spain is not dedicated to democracy, that the people of Iraq are on their own now.
I know it would be easy to say this was Aznar’s war, but it’s now bigger than that, and Spain owes the Iraqis what had been promised. I hope Zapatero reconsiders.
UPDATE: Harley, one of the wisest voices on the liberal side of the blogs most of us read, has noted:
I’m just a little leery re making judgements about the Spanish people’s dedication to democracy based on their willingness to contribute blood and treasure to a war they didn’t want to be a part of in the first place.
I agree my phrasing there was not well chosen. I do not doubt Spain’s dedication to Democracy. In fact, I celebrate what happened there Sunday as a sign of the strength of their Democracy.
I do, however, feel that Spain has an obligation that cannot simply be voted away. I’d like Zapatero to be really clear about why Spain is leaving when the hard work of reconstruction still requires as many hands as the rest of the world can spare Iraq. The war being wrong doesn’t make the reconstruction wrong.
Edward,
Spanish troops comprise less than one percent of the boots on the ground in Iraq. Something like ninety percent of the Spanish populace opposed sending them in the first place. The Spanish people, by democractic election, have spoken.
And now Spain owes the Iraqi’s what someone else promised them and their dedication to democracy is questionable if they don’t?
This seems more an emotional reponse than a fair or logical one. Or: “Hey, maybe we did set your house on fire. But where else are you gonna live?”
This seems more an emotional reponse than a fair or logical one. Or: “Hey, maybe we did set your house on fire. But where else are you gonna live?”
Not sure what that last analogy means, Harley.
I don’t think it’s an emotional response…more of a sense that if “you break it, you own it.”
The question is no longer should Spain participate in the invasion, but rather should Spain help in the reconstruction. I personally think France, Germany, Russia, etc. should help in the reconstruction, but I most definitely feel the countries that broke it should own it.
I guess I’m thinking in terms of what would happen if all other countries joined Spain. Just leaving Iraq as it now stands. That may not be likely, but I actually support the effort now underway in Iraq…now that Hussein is gone and the people there need our help to ensure they’re going to be secure and not fall victim to another ruthless dictator.
I agree that Bush and Blair promised the Iraqi’s all this, not Aznar, per se, but I just don’t like the message it sends to leave at this point…if they could have done it earlier, that’d be one thing. Now it strikes me as irresponsible.
With regard to the Spanish people speaking. I was there and heard them loud and clear…they didn’t want to invade. I don’t know how they feel about their obligations now the invasion is complete, but I didn’t interpret the vote as a sign they feel they have none…I took it more as a sign that they were tired of Aznar lying to them.
Okay. How about “We broke it, you better help us fix it”?
I get your point. And agree re the reconstruction of Iraq. I’m just a little leery re making judgements about the Spanish people’s dedication to democracy based on their willingness to contribute blood and treasure to a war they didn’t want to be a part of in the first place. And that includes its aftermath.
As for the Spanish people speaking, Zapatero’s position re the troops in Iraq was fairly clear. I’m guessing the voters were well aware of it.
The Spaniards presence was mostly symbolic but their personnel still make substantive contributions to the rebuilding of the country. If the Spaniards leave Iraq, it will send the message to al Qaeda that attacking American allies will produce favorable results.
Bird Dog wrote:
I agree which is why many of us are concerned that the shift in Spain’s Iraq policy will encourage further attacks on US allies (I don’t think that the UK will be next though unless Blair starts to look vulnerable again). Once the first one leaves, it becomes easier for others to justify caving in.
The interesting thing to me is that from what I have read something like 80 plus percent of the Spanish people opposed going to Iraq but the opposition to it in France was only about 70 percent. Which theoretically means that while the previous Spanish government was a better ally than the French government, there was actually greater support for liberating Iraq in France than Spain.
AFAIK the deal always was that the Spanish served till the first of July? The Dutch have sent troops but only garanteed their presence till that date too; our government & congress have to decide later this year wether we will send more troops or not.
Currently a majority (60% I think I read) is in favour of bringing our troops home, but the percentage might easily change – and does not reflect what choice our government will make.
However, *if* we decide to stop sending troops to Iraq it is nice to be prepared for the eloquent thank-you we might receive. I am sure the Spanish people really appreciate the empathic response from their allies too.