A psychological boost against Iraq insurgents

The killing on Wednesday, in an American air strike north of Baghdad, of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, is the biggest US military success since the capture of former President Saddam Hussein in December 2003. There is no doubt that Zarqawi's death is an important development in the war against the insurgents in Iraq but it does not signify the victory over them or the end of the war.

When Saddam Hussein was captured, many people thought this signalled the end of the insurgency. They were wrong and we all know how the war has progressed since then. Al-Qaeda is an ideology and while Zarqawi could be blown up, one cannot blow up an ideology. Soon after Zarqawi's death, a statement on an Islamist Website, said to be from Al-Qaeda, said: "The death of our leaders only makes us more determined to continue the jihad."

Both US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed the news from Baghdad and Mr Bush said the death would help "turn the tide" in Iraq. Politically, Mr Bush, whose public approval ratings are at rock bottom - only 35 per cent of Americans approve of his handling of the war - stands to gain from Zarqawi's departure, but I think his ratings will only go up if things really get better in Iraq and it is too early to make any predictions at this stage.

Mr Bush said that while Zarqawi's death was "a severe blow to Al-Qaeda, we have tough days ahead of us in Iraq that will require the continued patience of the American people." In the circumstances, that was probably the best response Mr Bush could have given. Yes, Zarqawi's death has dealt a psychological blow to the insurgents and jihadis - and a psychological boost for the new Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nouri Maliki, but most analysts fear an upswing in violence - at least in the short-term - in order for the insurgents and jihadis to prove that they have not been defeated.

The death of Zarqawi took place shortly before the Iraqi Parliament approved the key posts of defence, interior and national security ministers, three key posts that had not been allocated despite the formation of a new government last month, due to feuding between the rival parliamentary blocs. The post of Defence Minister went to a Sunni while the interior and national security portfolios went to Shi'ite politicians. Whether this latest development could help prevent the country from sliding into further sectarian violence and civil war is yet to be seen, but along with Zarqawi's exit it offered a glimmer of hope to the young Iraqi government.

Will Zarqawi's departure mean a change of tactics by the insurgents? It has been said that that sources within the militant leader's network provided the intelligence that helped the Americans and Iraqis to locate him. If this is true it implies that Zarqawi was losing popularity among his own supporters, possibly because his continuous targeting of Iraqi civilians and well as his hatred of Shi'ite Muslims were discrediting their cause.

It is possible that the insurgents will now refocus their attacks on the Iraqi and American security forces and refrain from attacking civilians, which will be of little comfort to both the Iraqi government and the US, especially if it leads to greater unity between the different jihadi and insurgent groups.

Although I acknowledge the significance of Zarqawi's death, I am not particularly optimistic that things will change for the better in Iraq. Last week's events perhaps offered a glimmer of hope but we'll just have to wait and see.

Isolated in Europe?

William Hague, the British Conservative Party's foreign policy spokesman, on Wednesday reiterated a pledge made by his party leader, David Cameron, to leave the European People's Party (EPP), the centre-right bloc in the European Parliament, to enter into an alliance with other like-minded eurosceptic parties.

Mr Hague gave a speech in which he called for "less centralisation and control in favour of freedom and flexibility". But who wouldn't agree with such a statement, especially those belonging to mainstream centre-right parties, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and European Commission President José Manuel Barroso?

Ms Merkel's party, the Christian Democrats (CDU), the largest party in the EPP, is in favour of free trade and against new powers being surrendered to Brussels, for example. True, the CDU is in favour of the European Constitutional Treaty, and the UK Conservatives are not, but surely that is no reason to leave the EPP? The Conservatives and their EPP sister parties have a lot in common and it would be foolish of them to leave the group.

The Conservatives have so far been able to influence the EPP on important legislation and they also sit on key parliamentary committees as a result of their affiliation with the bloc. That would end if they had to pull out of the EPP. Their influence would decline rapidly, they would be virtually isolated and would end up being associated with fringe groupings within the Parliament. Surely the sensible thing to do would be to remain anchored within the EPP. I hope Mr Cameron has a serious rethink.