The U.S. Mission in Iraq - Research Paper Example

?U.S. War in Iraq Introduction War in Iraq (operation Iraqi Freedom) also referred to Second Gulf war began on March 20, 2003 under the administration of the former United States of America President George W. Bush and ended in August 2010 under Obama’s administration. Bush administration claimed that Saddam Hussein was a threat to security of the United States and international political stability. This is because Saddam’s regime could collude with some irresponsible leaders to acquire and use dangerous weapons. According to Bush’s administration, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a threat to United States security and international peace. To him, Saddam was developing and stock piling weapons of mass destruction, denied Iraq people democratic space and his administration abused human rights. Furthermore, Saddam was accused of financing and harboring Al-Qaeda. However, facts and evidences refuted the above allegations and revealed that it was Bush’s and his cronies’ decision to attack Iraq in order to secure supply of oil. Statement French and Jason claimed that terrorism and weapons of mass destruction compelled United States of America to lead war against Iraq (61). However, United States of America should not have led war against Iraq. All facts and supplementary evidence failed to link Iraq with any form of violation of both international law and United States security. On the contrary, security, integrity and independence of sovereign Iraq were adversely violated following clever statements and manipulation of facts carried out by former President Bush administration. Bush used clever statements to influence decision of the UN Security Council and allied nations to destroy Saddam’s regime. Bush administration painted Saddam as defiant and deceptive. As compared to Iran, Libya and North Korea, Iraq had less capability of developing WMD. Doherty confirmed that war in Iraq was not driven by bad intelligence but rather it was by Choice of Bush and his cronies. Bush relied on his National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which were doctored to mislead Americans and the world to back the war against Saddam regime as planned. Justification why Iraq war was acceptable First reason why it was wrong to invade Iraq was that, Iraq did not possess or produced weapons of mass destruction. According to United Nations Security Council and United Nations General Assembly, the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission did not find evidence of weapons of mass destruction (199). Iraq Survey Group led by the United States of America revealed that Iraq ended its biological, chemical and nuclear programs in 1991. In fact in February 2001, Powell and Rumsfeld asserted that Iraq did not pose a nuclear threat. It was even revealed that Saddam did not have the capacity or intention to project conventional weapons against own neighbors leave alone weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, United States at that time declared that they had Saddam caged. The weapons that were suspected to be contained in Iran were Yellowcake uranium. Furthermore, the French government opined that Iraq had stockpiles of botulism and anthrax toxins and was able to produce VX within short notice. Sabri alleged that Saddam hid poisonous gas among Sunni tribe’s men but revealed that there were no biological weapons stocked piled or produced in Iraq. However, Bush’s administration maintained that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction even after facts presented by various investigators such as Wilson Joseph and Subri revealed otherwise. In 1995, according to report provided by defector General Hussein Kamel to the United Nation’s Security Council all chemical, biological, missiles and nuclear arsenals had been destroyed. Following repeated assessment that was done in May 2001, Iraq’s military was said to be fairly weak. In July 2001, Rice claimed that Saddam was not in control of North of Iraq and his military forces were not rebuilt or regroup. In September 2002, International Institute for Strategic Studies revealed that Iraq did not posses facilities and raw material to produce adequate fissile materials to produce nuclear. The report further said that it will take Iraq several years and support from other countries to build the nuclear capability. However, the report explained that Iraq was able to produce sufficient amount of anthrax in short notice (less than an hour upon demand) and this constituted a real threat. Iraq was no able to produce chemical weaponry at the time when inspection was carried out because most of the chemical plants and materials were destroyed during the Gulf War. In addition, nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction including bulk agents, CW munitions as well as precursors and production plants was disposed of in large quantities by UNSCOM. Iraq was not also able to produce long range missiles on its own. In addition Saddam regime accepted UN Resolution 1441 and cooperated with U.N inspectors. On 27 March, 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iraq had not resumed its nuclear program. Second reason why it was unacceptable to attack Iraq was that Saddam and his regime never supported terrorist as alleged. Saddam Hussein’s government was blamed for harboring and financing terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda. There was no evidence found linking Saddam’s government with Al-Qaeda and support for families of Palestinians who committed suicide bombing. Saddam Hussein regime has never waged Western terrorist attack since 1993, when former President Bush faced attempted assassination. Thus there was no compelling case to attack Iraq at that time. In fact al-Qaeda was only associated with Osama bin Laden. Intelligence and scientist failed to secure evidence that linked Anthrax to Iraq. In fact, Anthrax was an American strain. According to Cheney, there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein and his regime to September 11, terrorist attack in the United States soil. Furthermore, the idea to remove Saddam out of power was already hatched by 1998. In 1998, Congress passed the Liberation Act of 1998. The policy stated that United States supported the efforts to overthrow President Saddam Hussein of Iraq to promote democracy in Iraq. Facts and evidence produced by intelligence agencies and other parties did not regard Iraq and Saddam as an imminent, mortal or serious threat to American and the entire world. Therefore, decision to overthrow Saddam was not based on any terrorist links. Third, preemptive war was not appropriate against Iraq. On April 14, 1993, Iraqi Intelligence Service together with others made an attempt to assassinate President John W. Bush Senior. President Clinton retaliated by Bombing Bagdad. This cooled the tension between the two countries and no ugly incidents were reported between the two countries there after. Therefore, it should not have warranted sustained vendetta from President Bush Junior. Charles and Demy stated that preemptive war is a military action initiated by a specific country to remove immediate and credible threat facing that country (213-214). It is an act of self defense based on need to protect rights of its citizens. According to Michael Walzer and Net Crawfold (contemporary war theorists), preemptive war is a military retaliation in the face of War threat that will seriously compromise country’s political integrity and territorial intelligence. Countries should apply preemptive war for self defense, when faced with eminent attack, when perceived attack is likely to reduce the threat and when preemptive wars stick to proportionality and discrimination. However, before Iraq’s war, Iraq was considered caged and incapable of even attacking its neighbours bearing in mind that Saddam’s administration could not contain own troubles that were rampant in northern part of his country. Fourth, it was unlawful to attack Iraq. The sentiment that emanates from a number of leaders and scientists across the globe opposed war in Iraq. Powel admitted to have presented inaccurate case to UN Security Council on February 5, 2003 on status of weapons in Iraq alleging that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. In addition, a scientist named Rafid al-Janafi (Curveball) who defected from Iraq admitted that he lied to CIA that Iraq harbored biological weapons to present a strong case for invasion of Iraq. On January 20, 2003 Dominique de Villepin who was French foreign minister opined that use of military against Saddam Hussein would aggravate the situation. There was also wide spread anti-war groups, which involved over 36 million who demonstrated in major streets of the world against war in Iraq. On September 16, 2004, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan opined that War against Iraq did not conform to the UN Charter and thus was illegal. Lord Bingham described that war against Iraq was a serious violation of international law. He stated that United States of America and Britain acted like ‘world vigilante’. Invading and attacking Iraq on grounds of lack of democracy was not appropriate. It is true according to Sterngold there was no democracy in Iraq because Iraq leadership was tribal and clan-oriented. Bush administration promised to leave behind robust democratic government after Iraq invasion. However, there are better ways of promoting democracy in such countries. Normally, need for democracy should have been an internal pressure emanating from increasing number of frustrated young Arabs with little opportunities of better jobs and education. Egypt and Arab countries rejected the idea of imposing United States oriented democracies in Arab countries because Arab countries had unique situations. Rozeff argued that the Iraq war was meant to remove Saddam Hussein from power even before September 11. In February 19, 1998, 40 prominent people including former high ranking United States officials wrote an open letter to President Clinton asking him to change Iraq political regime. In the letter, Clinton was asked save Americans and the entire world from Saddam’s scourge and threats. The letter recommended war of insurrection where anti-Saddam military forces will be assisted by the American forces to overthrow Saddam. The letter contrasted heavily with positive views and opinions concerning Iraq by majority of Bush administrators. Former president of Iraq Saddam Hussein was accused of developing chemical and biological munitions. United State Secretary of State and Defense claimed that Iraq was a threat to Americans everywhere as well as to their allies. Therefore, it was suggested that an elaborate political and military scheme was needed to overthrow Saddam and his regime. However, evidences and facts indicated that Saddam was a minor dictator who did not pose serious threat. Consequently, it can be argued that America waged war against Iraq on a totally different agenda. According to Zarembka, United States of America led war against Iraq because they wanted to secure oil supply (136). This was evident when President Bush and his cabinet agreed that Iraq was an obstruction to smooth flow of oil to international market from the Middle East. It was claimed that Saddam Hussein may use oil as a weapon to manipulate oil markets under his export programme against the wishes of the United States of America. Therefore, it was necessary to intervene by using United States Military. Furthermore, Mackay revealed that President Bush Junior was pursuing his interest in the oil industry (83). His personal link with oil is evident because he once owned Spectrum 7 Oil Company and wanted to protect his and company’s interest. Saddam was accused of trying to control Persian Gulf region and was regarded as an insult to the US. Iraq had second largest oil reserves in the world but lacked the capacity to exploit them. This is because Saddam Hussein and his regime could not allow foreign companies to mine oil in Iraq. Therefore, the only option was to seize Saddam Hussein and privatize oil exploration in Iraq. Results of the war in Iraq Following the invasion in Iraq, there was insurgency and evolution of a new form of Al-Qaeda in Iraq as Sunni and Shia sectarian groups waged war against each other and coalition military forces. The number of internally displaced persons in Iraq multiplied. Furthermore, according to Iraq’s anticorruption board, 35 percent of children in Iraq were orphans. His was attributed to war. In March 2008, humanitarian situation in Iraq was deplorable. Following invasion and occupation in Iraq, coalition forces caused was crimes and rapes. For example, on March 6th, 14 year old girl was murdered and raped. Operation Iraq killed thousands of civilians, wasted billion of money and made United States of America riskier. Conclusion Iraq war that lasted for about eight years was an insult to Iraq, more so to Saddam regime. There is no evidence that linked Saddam Hussein to neither terrorism nor architect of weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, Iraq did not violate United States security or international peace. The main reason for attacking Iraq was to secure oil supply and reasons such as presence of weapons of mass destruction, human rights abuses and democracy were used as a key to gain access to Iraq oilfields. Sources Charles, Daryl and Timothy Demy. War, Peace, and Christianity: Questions and Answers from a Just-War Perspective. Wheaton: Illinois, Crossway, 2010. Doherty, Patrick. Why Bush Went to War. 20 April, 2011. French, Peter and Jason. War and border crossings: ethics when cultures clash. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005. Globe & Mail. Human Rights Watch Decries Iraq War Bell. Publishing Inc. Globemedia (January 26, 2004). 20 April, 2011 . James Sterngold Plan for Democracy in Iraq May Be Folly Experts Also Question U.S. Ability to Reform Entire Middle East Associated Press. Common dreams. (April 13, 2003). 20 April, 2011 . Mackay, Neil. The war on truth: or everything you always wanted to know about the invasion of Iraq but your government wouldn't tell you. Havertown: Casemate Publishers, 2007. Nakhoul, Samia. Iraq - UN Resolution Futile Because Bush Wants War. Rense (February 23, 2010) 20 April, 2011 . Rozeff, Michael. How Did Saddam Hussein Become a Grave Threat? 20 April, 2011< http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff42.html>. United Nations Security Council and United Nations General Assembly. Report of the Security Council: 1 August 2004 - 31 July 2005. Geneva: United Nations Publications, 2005. Zarembka, Paul. The hidden history of 9-11-2001. Oxford: Emerald Group Publishing, 2006. Read More