US struggles to hold together Iraq coalition

[JoFerret]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20040714/wl_oneworld/2216899631089809985&e=1


WASHINGTON, D.C. Jul 14 (Christian Science Monitor) The Philippine government's decision to withdraw "as soon as possible" from Iraq (news - web sites) in response to threats against one of its citizens being held hostage there is the latest sign of cracks in the coalition the United States is trying to hold together.

Though the Philippines' contingent is small, made up of 51 soldiers limited to what the government calls "humanitarian work," the government's action suggests both the malaise of some coalition members in the dangerous Iraqi environment - and the troubling inroads that insurgents are making with extreme tactics.

At the same time, however, the Australian government of staunch American ally Prime Minister John Howard announced Tuesday that it would soon send extra troops to Iraq - a decision that is already being debated at home ahead of elections expected this fall.


The Philippine government appeared to be trying to use ambiguous statements Tuesday to accomplish two things: the release of a truck driver that kidnappers have threatened with beheading, and preservation of close ties with the US. But withdrawal under any cover would deal a blow to US efforts to enhance the international presence and burden-sharing in Iraq, some analysts say.

<more>

[tabasco]

1. This was inevitable.

Most of the "willing" members of the coalition were bribed or coerced to sign on to the invasion, then to only contribute a minimal amount of troops. But it allowed the Bush propagandists to claim we had a coalition of several nations.
The coalition is the same as the justification for the Iraq invasion - a sham. It was only a matter of time before the willing lost their will.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Coalition of the "willing"

That was one of the most bullshit pseudo-religious slogans yet. "willing" to do what? "willing" send some army men with the expectation that there might be some quid pro quo later on when things things turned green and the oil flowed freely? For these countries it was worth the risk of a few hundred lives. However, since it has gotten shitty there it looks like the risk isn't worth it anymore.

[quaoar]

3. Coalition of the willing?

How about the Coalition of the Billing.

[struggle4progress]

4. Future of U.S.-led coalition in Iraq dims

By ROBIN WRIGHT and BRADLEY GRAHAM
The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration faces growing challenges in holding together the 32-nation coalition deployed in Iraq, with four countries already gone, another four due to leave by September and others now quietly making known their intention to wind down or depart before the political transition is complete next year, according to officials from 28 participating countries.

The drama over the Filipino hostage in Iraq, which led the Philippine government to say this week it will leave before its August mandate expires, is only the latest problem -- and one of the smaller issues -- in US efforts to sustain the 22,000-strong force that, with 140,000 US troops, forms the multinational coalition trying to stabilize postwar Iraq.

Norway also quietly pulled out its 155 military engineers this month, leaving behind only some 15 personnel to assist a new Nato-coordinated effort to help train and equip Iraqi security forces. New Zealand intends to pull out its 60 engineers by September, while Thailand plans to withdraw its more than 450 troops in September barring a last-minute political reversal that Thai officials consider unlikely, say envoys from both countries. “It’s 90-percent definite that we’re going,” said a Thai diplomat.

The Netherlands is likely to pull out next spring after the first of three Iraqi elections, while Polish military officials told the Pentagon that Poland’s large contingent will probably leave in mid-2005, say other diplomats.
<snip>

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=Focus&oid=55286