The UK Army Chief of Staff has launched an extra-ordinary attack on the Labour government’s policies in an interview for Friday’s Daily Mail. This guy is no liberal and indeed condemns the “threat to Christian principles” in the UK.

He also makes what could be considered a side-swipe at Rumsfeld and the neo-cons:

“I think history will show that the planning for what happened after the initial successful war fighting phase was poor, probably based more on optimism than sound planning,” he said.

“The original intention was that we put in place a liberal democracy that was an exemplar for the region, was pro West and might have a beneficial effect on the balance within the Middle East.”

“That was the hope, whether that was a sensible or naïve hope history will judge. I don’t think we are going to do that. I think we should aim for a lower ambition.”

He also calls for the withdrawal from Iraq “soon”.
General Sir Richard Dannatt is operational head of the British army (the Queen is the titular commander-in-chief) so the importance of the statement is not so much what he said, which many others have commented, but who he is. This is his analysis of the current position in Iraq:

He says clearly we shoud “get ourselves out sometime soon because our presence exacerbates the security problems.”

“We are in a Muslim country and Muslims’ views of foreigners in their country are quite clear.”

As a foreigner, you can be welcomed by being invited in a country, but we weren’t invited certainly by those in Iraq at the time.

“The military campaign we fought in 2003 effectively kicked the door in. Whatever consent we may have had in the first place, may have turned to tolerance and has largely turned to intolerance.”

“That is a fact. I don’t say that the difficulties we are experiencing round the world are caused by our presence in Iraq but undoubtedly our presence in Iraq exacerbates them.”  

The interview also makes criticism of domestic policy in the UK like the closure of military hospitals in favour of treatment in specialist units within NHS hospitals. But it is the percieved threat to “Christian values” with its echoes of Bush’s “Crusade” that will possibly cause the most damage.

“Our society has always been embedded in Christian values; once you have pulled the anchor up there is a danger that our society moves with the prevailing wind.”

“There is an element of the moral compass spinning. I think it is up to society to realise that is the situation we are in.”

“We can’t wish the Islamist challenge to our society away and I believe that the army both in Iraq and Afghanistan and probably wherever we go next, is fighting the foreign dimension of the challenge to our accepted way of life.”

“We need to face up to the Islamist threat, to those who act in the name of Islam and in a perverted way try to impose Islam by force on societies that do not wish it.”

“It is said that we live in a post Christian society. I think that is a great shame. The broader Judaic-Christian tradition has underpinned British society. It underpins the British army.”

These last ill-considered comments will probably be used to re-inforce the opposition in both Iraq and Afghanistan by legitimising claims about those campaigns being anti-Muslim