---

Iraq

I would also like to thank the Prime Minister for his statement and to salute the valour, the skill and the perseverance of the troops, and the courage of their families. Let us also not forget the courage of the families of the British hostages who are still held in Iraq. I welcome, of course, the proposal to bring our troops out of Iraq. Their continued presence there contributes increasingly little to Iraq. Since withdrawing to the Basra air base, we have effectively become impotent, defending ourselves and little else. I am sure that the Prime Minister would agree that the major indirect effect of our deployment is to stretch our overall military capability and so constrain the success of our efforts to bring stability to Afghanistan. I regret that there is still no real clarity in detail on when we will finally leave. That continues the odd nod and wink strategy that has guided our approach to Iraq for some time. Such uncertainty about timing is unfair on our troops, unfair on their families and, of course, unfair on the Iraqis. [Interruption.] ... Why should the families of our troops or the troops themselves believe the proposed withdrawal plan, given the confusion that the Prime Minister created—confusion that has not been explained today—when announcing a timetable for withdrawal last October that was never implemented in full? I am told that part of the reason for that is concern about sensitivities in the White House—that the Americans do not want to see us withdraw from Iraq. Does he agree that it is in America's interest to release us from our obligations in Iraq, precisely so that we can do the job that we need to do in Afghanistan? Can the Prime Minister also provide us with an update on the total costs and projected costs of our commitment in Iraq? At a time of increased economic woes here at home, the cost of our misguided engagement in Iraq is of considerable public interest. As we draw our troops down from Iraq, will the Prime Minister assure the House that we will step up our presence in Afghanistan? When will he start deploying more resources to that vital conflict? When will he start moving the vital equipment needed, such as armoured vehicles, out of Iraq to the front line in Helmand? Finally, it is impossible to discuss Iraq without mentioning Iran. Our troops' safety in Iraq and Afghanistan is intimately bound up with Iran's influence. The Prime Minister has just come back from Israel, where he rightly condemned Iran's threats to that country. However, will he learn the lesson of our disastrous tacit support for Israel's incursion into Lebanon two years ago and make it clear to the House today, and to Israel and the country at large, that he will not support, even tacitly, any unilateral Israeli military strike in Iran? Two years ago, the then Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw), said that an attack on Iran would be ““completely nuts””. Does the Prime Minister agree?