7 of 37

Write now Article Tools

There are three reasons why America's tactics have failed in Iraq. The first is that they have nobody credible to negotiate with. Secondly, the Iraqis are just getting better and better at the art of guerrilla warfare. Finally, although the warmongers probably don't realise it, Iraqi is actually the stronger contestant in this war: it is the USA that is the weaker participant.

What is strange about this war is how different it is from previous anti-imperialist struggles in one important aspect: there is no government or political organisation that can be said to head the resistance. Usually the resistance is headed by one political organisation, as happened in Vietnam. Or it is headed by a charismatic local leader, such as Fidel Castro Ruz in Cuba. In either case a leadership existed that could claim to speak for the people seeking liberation. In the event that the leadership was abroad, it could persuade the autonomously created guerrilla groups to unite under one national banner. France, for instance had at least eight separate resistance groups that covered just about every shade of political opinion in the country. However, it also had General Charles de Gaulle in London who could send his representatives into the country to cajole the groups to unite. Iraq seems to have a myriad of groups, most of whom are doing sterling service in freedom's cause, but the outside observer is entitled to wonder just why the Iraqi General de Gaulle has not put in an appearance?

The answer is that he probably doesn't exist. Iraq's guerrillas are waging a war that is both very new and very old. It is new because they are using modern weaponry, but it is old because their leaders are locally based family, clan and tribal elders. That is how wars used to be fought until the rise of the modern state. That modern state has only a thin veneer in many parts of the world, and in Iraq it has vanished altogether.

What this means for imperialism is that the resistance leaders only control the men under their direct command. The Americans can negotiate with one, but he only speaks for himself. He may not even be able to bring his group into line. If an agreement is reached with him, a junior member of his group could decide to assassinate him and carry on the fight. This is tribal war, people, and that is how it is waged.

The Iraqis have proven themselves to be adept at irregular war. Hardly a surprise since their background involves tribal raids using light cavalry tactics. What has come

• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Why US strategies in Iraq are failing?
We want to hear your view. Write now!