Sir, I believe that, contrary to the view of Lord Lamont of Lerwick and Kenneth Clarke (Norman Lamont’s Comment, September 5), Iraq is at the core of the pursuit of al-Qaeda. The aim is to facilitate the modernisation of the Middle East, which, with the connivance of the West over 50 years, has become dominated by a fundamentalist version of Islam now threatening our own societies.

Iraq has become the focus by attracting a previously invisible and dispersed enemy into the open. The fundamentalists have consequently been obliged to fight a defensive war against modern armies. They are now attempting to turn our flank by creating chaos.

Lord Lamont doubts that this conflict can be resolved within an “acceptable time frame” of, say, ten years. This is a war for hearts and minds, of allowing previously suppressed social forces to flourish. There has indeed been a crucial failure of political strategy in the aftermath of the invasion. This is not an argument against intervention, but for perseverance.

Nowhere has democracy been “rolled out like Astroturf”. To dismiss Iraq, which has a high skills base, as a “backward country” is arrogant.

The stakes remain high and the outcome undetermined.

DAVID ISAACS
Henley-on-Thames
Oxfordshire

From Mr Robin Howard

Sir, Kenneth Clarke and his new-found ally Norman Lamont seem to have taken leave of their senses. Saddam Hussein’s regime was one of the most horrendous to have reared its ugly head anywhere in the world since the end of the Second World War.

To have stood loyally by the side of our American allies in removing him from power is something of which we should all be proud, and to suggest that we should have been deterred from doing so by fear of the consequences is to cast a wholly unwarranted slur on the fortitude of the British people.

ROBIN HOWARD
Croydon, Surrey

Explore Letters

• Feedback