British forces in Iraq to drop to 2,500

Earlier this year, right around the time the Bush administration announced its so-called “surge” in Iraq, British troops started to withdraw in large numbers. This morning, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he would cut the number of British troops in Iraq in half by next spring, according to an AP report, leaving a contingent of 2,500 soldiers, none of whom will be involved in combat missions.

The head of the security committee on the Basra city council, Hakim al-Miyahi, welcomed the decision.

“It is a good step because the withdrawal will be gradual and not abrupt. This means that we will have enough time to get our security forces ready to handle the security issue in Basra, and we expect this to happen in the next year. We hope that the British will continue their support in training and arming Iraqi forces.”

Murtada Ali, 35, a taxi driver in Basra, said “I think this withdrawal will improve the security in Basra. The presence of British forces in the province has complicated the situation. The lives of civilians are under constant danger when British forces come under attack.”

That’s a point that has a certain political salience right now — fewer outside troops leads to less violence. Indeed, Brown told Parliament today that the “present security situation [in Basra] has been calmer” since British forces began withdrawing months ago.

This Reuters report drives the point home:

Residents of Iraq’s southern city of Basra have begun strolling riverfront streets again after four years of fear, their city much quieter since British troops withdrew from the grand Saddam Hussein-era Basra Palace.

Political assassinations and sectarian violence continue, some city officials say, but on a much smaller scale than at any time since British troops moved into the city after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

Mortar rounds, rockets and small arms fire crashed almost daily into the palace, making life hazardous for British and Iraqis alike in Iraq’s second-largest city. To many Basrans the withdrawal of the British a month ago removed a proven target.

“The situation these days is better. We were living in hell … the area is calm since their withdrawal,” said housewife Khairiya Salman, who lives near the palace.

You mean, troop withdrawal didn’t lead terrorists to follow the British home? It didn’t invite al Qaeda?

Who would have guessed?

Gee, I guess the next thing we’ll hear about Britain is how Al-Queada and a host of other assorted terrorists groups are invading England. After all, aren’t we fighting them there so don’t have to fight them at home?

  • Consider also that the Brit rule in Basra has been a bit less controversial (with the exception of one incident — about a year ago, maybe?) than ours is, in the rest of the country. They never had the Blackwater . So, if Basra is feeling relief and enjoying a greater degree of peace than before, wouldn’t the relief in Baghdad and Anbar be even greater if *we* pulled out?

  • And you gotta know that with the British gone, the local powers that be can finally go after their enemies and snuff them out properly without risking getting attacked by the British. And no one will report the snuffing because there isn’t a western reporter left in the area. So we’ll finally get some peace and quiet, ala Saddam Hussein. Which, after all the bloodshed for the last four years, the Iraqi people might go for. It’s almost like they planned it that way.

  • At last — it’s so refreshing to feel proud to be British. I thoroughly recommend it to anyone who can work to achieve a decent government in their country. Really, seriously, it’s worth all you’ve got. Good luck!

  • Comments are closed.