Was the Iraq War fought because Britain still owed the US £243m from its post-WWII loan?
I'm not sure I agree with this argument of Nick Cohen's from April 2002. £243m just wouldn't be enough money, not given the war must have cost a multiple of that (and that such a cost was easily foreseeable).Ruth Kelly, the Treasury Minister, told Parliament the other day that Britain still owed £243 million. Rather than relieve the debt of Third World peasants, Britain, she said, intended to meet the bill in full by 31 December 2006. Ms Kelly is a revelation. Until her statement, Blair's sudden enthusiasm for a needless war against Iraq was a mystery; his failure to tell Bush that British troops can't be both peace-keepers and combatants in Afghanistan, a dereliction of duty; his inability to force a concession from Washington on any issue from Kyoto to steel tariffs, a national humiliation.
Now what was baffling is clear. Debtors are in no position to demand concessions from creditors. They must do as they're told. According to the Treasury, Britain will be free to have an independent foreign policy on 1 January 2007. I'll leave it to you to imagine how many wars Blair will have fought by then
Labels: economics, Iraq, Nick Cohen
posted by Matthew @ 7/30/2007 03:35:00 PM
Comments: 1
