Political Corrections

with Mungo MacCallum

Now it's Bush's turn to cut and run

The Americans are now musing about withdrawing most of their troops from Iraq by the end of next year, and you can bet those musings will turn into hard policy before very long.

The public will accept nothing less; as with Vietnam, the Iraqi caper is no longer seen as a noble adventure in which the invincible military machine carries the American dream to the oppressed and suffering of the world, but as a messy exercise whose political cost is well on the way to outweighing any possible benefits. It has not yet got to the stage of mass demonstrations in the streets - the current well-sourced musings are designed to make sure it never does. But there are straws in the wind.

Grieving parents are being given television time to ask just what is the noble cause George Bush says their children have to die for. Protests, though still small, are becoming more focussed. The hawks in Washington are no longer quite as gung ho - it's now quite a while since we saw Don Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney giving a hairy-chested harangue to the troops.

They are not about to admit they were wrong, and no-one's saying that they wouldn't try to get another invasion up and running if the opportunity arose - after all Iraq, if nothing else, has been a nice little earner for them and their mates. But right now the time is rapidly approaching for a phased withdrawal, or a strategic handover, or whatever the current jargon is for cut and run.

It is worth noting that the musings make very few references to the old objective of finishing the job and a great many to the end of 2006; in other words the exit strategy, the timetable pooh-poohed by John Howard and Alexander Downer in particular, is now a political reality in Washington.

And when America goes, how far behind will Australia be? About one nanosecond. By a remarkable coincidence the former head of our armed forces, Peter Cosgrove, said this week that he too thought it would be nice to be out by around the end of 2006 and couldn't see any real obstacles.

He also noted that the presence of foreign troops on Iraq had made the place a major training ground for terrorists, which was obviously not to the advantage of the Coalition of the Willing and its allies. And yes, this is the same Peter Cosgrove who was wheeled in by Howard to sit on Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty when the latter had the impertinence to suggest that countries which sent troops to Iraq increased their likelihood of being targeted by terrorists. Even he has finally succumbed to the bleeding obvious.

Howard and Downer, of course, have not: they continue to peddle the childish line that the reasons the terrorists hate us is because we're goodies and they're baddies and it's as simple as that. It's a handy theory because it can be used to justify any measure, however draconian, inflicted on the public under the pretence of safeguarding it from an implacable and irrational enemy. The fact that the theory itself and the responses it produces are equally irrational appears not to have occurred to its proponents.

Which brings us, as all things seem to these days, to David Hicks. It is now clear that he, and indeed all those imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay, not to mention the place itself, have become a serious embarrassment to Washington.

The same applies to the so-called tribunals set up to run the show trials on Hicks and his fellow accused. Washington would much prefer it if Australia followed the examples of Britain, and indeed of America itself, and refused to allow its citizens to participate in the farce. But no; Howard, Downer and Phillip Ruddock are determined that Hicks will be subjected to a process which has been condemned by every legal authority - except, of course, their own.

When it was revealed last week that three of the military prosecutors had pulled out, describing the tribunal as not only incompetent and unjust but actually rigged, the reaction was, once again, irrational. Ruddock sniffed that the prosecutors couldn't be very important because he had never encountered them in his dealings with the Americans. Downer responded to a question on the AM program by screaming that oh yes, the ABC thought it was the only body that could run trials, didn't it?

And Howard, at his suburban solicitor best, replied: "The head of the military commission operation said that those allegations have been extensively investigated over a two month period by the people against whom the allegations have been made" - and, surprise surprise, they declared themselves innocent.

So that's all right then, and if David Hicks is a good boy from now on, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny will all bring him presents. I know, because John Howard told me.

And just when you thought he could not get any more arrogant, crass and insensitive, our beloved Prime Minister celebrated the 60th anniversary of Hiroshima Day by announcing that his government would take control of the Northern Territory uranium mines to ensure a regular supply of nuclear material to eager buyers.

Not only that, but he was looking forward to a huge expansion of the industry and he hoped the states would all join in the fun and dig up and sell as much of the stuff as they could find. But only to approved customers, naturally. Yes, Prime Minister.