THE allegations of abuse inflicted on Iraqi civilians involve a tiny minority of the British Army.

But the photographs shown across the world tarnish the good name and reputation of the 65,000 British soldiers who have served in Iraq.

One of the reasons Britain went to war was to rid Iraq of a regime capable of torturing innocent people.

Our soldiers are there to protect Iraqi civilians, not to inflict horrendous and humiliating abuse on them.

During the first Gulf War, we in Britain were outraged by the images of beaten captured RAF servicemen broadcast from Baghdad. We were outraged by TV footage of Saddam Hussein shaking the hands of British men, women and children being used as human shields.

The same kind of revulsion will be felt by ordinary Iraqi men, women and children who see photographs of the treatment meted out to their countrymen by soldiers who are supposed to be their liberators.

The hard work and endeavour by members of the British armed services in building up trust and goodwill in Iraq over the past 22 months may have been destroyed in an instant with the publication of 22 photographs.

The elections in two weeks' time are supposed to herald a new future for Iraq, an opportunity to replace tyranny with democracy

As they cast their votes, how do we convince the people of Iraq that British soldiers are a force for good rather than evil? Or that British soldiers are any different from the henchmen who slavishly carried out Saddam Hussein's sadistic orders?