Iraqs Competence to Proliferate Nuclear Weapons - Essay Example

The Decision to go to War in Iraq – An Analysis Introduction This research essay will analyse the topic “The Decision to go to War in Iraq (HC 813-I)” in detail and will evaluate whether UK has followed the Jus ad bellum as allies failed to find out even a single WMD from Saddam’s stockpile as it had been alleged by the allies as the main reason for waging war in Iraq. This research essay will also analyse in detail the Islamic jurisprudence in employing chemical weapons against Iran and innocent civilians by Saddam regions and whether Saddam acted against the Quran preaching. The Decision to go war in Iraq and Intelligence Dossier The occupation of Iraq in 2003 by the UK, US and its coalition members was seen by the Arab media and religious leaders as an initiative to annihilate the Iraq to safeguard the Israel, to control its oil fields and to foster animosity between shiis and Sunnis. Muslim leaders disregarded the claim of USA that war in Iraq was to put an end to use of WMD by Saddam, to severe Iraq’s connections with the Al-Qaeda, to declare Iraq as a democracy, to castigate Iraq for failure to comply with UNO’s Security Council resolutions and to throw out an unruly dictator1 . Information collection inside Iraq is seen as a most challenging job as Saddam is the most enigmatic and tyrannical leader in the world2. As per Dr Gary Samore, the record of gathering information by Western intelligence agencies on Iraqs various weapons programmes is very meagre3. The decision to go to war in Iraq was based on human rights abuses and its weapons’ programmes. UK war on Iraq was based upon current and serious threat” from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The prime objective remains to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction and their associated Programmes and means of delivery, including prohibited ballistic missiles, as set out in the relevant United Nations Security Resolutions (UNSCRs). On 24 September 2002, a dossier was published by the UK Government containing its evaluation of Iraq’s programmes to build up WMD (the ‘September Dossier’). The Government’s dossier of September 2002 sets out in detail Iraq’s history of production, use and concealment of chemical and biological weapons, and its pursuit of a nuclear weapons programme. UNSCOM’s final report of 1999 the then Executive Chairman concluded that Iraq continued to hide substantial information about prohibited programmes and probably continued to develop them. The Iraqi chemical industry could produce mustard gas almost immediately, and limited amounts of nerve gas within months4. Iraq’s competence to Proliferate Nuclear Weapons As early as in 1980s, it has been suspected that Iraq came very near to proliferate nuclear weapons, and it was also a major manufacturer of biological and chemical weapons as it deployed in its war with Iran and against Kurdish population in Iraq. Iraq’s continuously deployed chemical weapons against Kurdish and Iranians, mainly during the Iran –Iraq war which was considered as one of the most flagrant breaches of international understandings excluding the use of such chemical weapons against civilians5. Further, the September 11 attack in USA perpetrated by the Muslim Terrorists groups demonstrated their ability to use WMD against non-Muslims. Indeed, allies strongly believed that Saddam nearly was in possession of BW production equipment, and stocks of WMD weapons. In any event, Iraq has the know-how and kit to renew an offensive BW ability within weeks. It was alleged that unless Iraq’s nuclear programme had not been intervened due to the conflict in Iraq, Saddam might have owned nuclear weapon by the end of 1993. Further, it was suspected that If Iraq could source the needed materials and machinery in foreign market particularly from Niger, it is capable of manufacturing a crude air-delivered nuclear machine in about five years. Due to this, it is alleged that Iraq could devise a feasible nuclear weapon now6. UK’s Intelligent Machinery The United Kingdom’s is having well established intelligence machinery in the world. UK’s security and intelligence agencies gather raw intelligence from technical and human sources. UK intelligent agency will assess the reliability and quality of the intelligence so gathered before initiating any action on it. Due to intelligence failure in Iraq’s issue , it seems that there was only restricted access to dependable human intelligence in Iraq, and due to this fact , the United Kingdom may have been greatly dependent on technical intelligence gathered by USA, particularly gathered from exiles and defectors with a little bit of imagination of their own. As per UK government’s September 2002 dossier which stated that as per the intelligence carried, UK government was of the opinion that Iraq was continuously engaged in the proliferation of biological and chemical agents; has secret plans for the deployment of biological and chemical weapons, targeting against its own Shia population. It is further alleged Iraq has the capability of deploying these weapons within 45 minutes after receiving an order from the high command and has the authority and control over setup in place to deploy biological and chemical weapons. Further, it was alleged that Iraq had the capability of deploying mobile laboratories for armed force use, confirming the earlier reports about the mobile proliferation of biological warfare agents; practised illegal programmes to obtain inhibited materials of probable use in the proliferation of biological and chemical weapons’ programmes7. UK strongly believed that Iraq had the stock pile about 20 Al Hussein missiles, in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 687. It is said that these missiles could be employed with customary, biological or chemical warheads and, with a range of up to 650km, which are competent of targeting a number of nations in the provinces, including Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Cyprus, and Iran 8. Veracity of September Dossier The September 2002 dossier claimed that Iraq had the ability to deploy WMD within 45-minutues on the order from the Iraqi high command against its Shia population. UK government January 30 2003 document namely “Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation” was alleged to have been plagiarised from various academic journals, and both the above documents were later turned to be dodgy dossiers9. On 25 September 2002, citing Mori poll, the Telegraph stated that the September Dossier failed to make a strong case for initiating a military action against Iraq as about 48% of the interviewees were not in favour of military action against Iraq whereas just 30% gave their node for such an action. Guardian also further stated that dossier failed to influence leaders of the world especially Russia, France and Germany who were not in favour of US-UK coalition military action against Iraq10. Blair, UK’s then- Prime Minister acknowledged that there was no imminent danger of nuclear attack to UK from Iraq, but this was later excluded from the published version. Critics heavily lamented about the UK government inaction against various fissures available in September 2002 dossier as the dossier never came out on strong terms that Iraq posed to be an imminent and current threat to UK’s security. There was also severe criticism that dossier did not come out with the details whether Iraq had the capability to deploy biological or chemical weapons against UK within 45 minutes by ballistic missiles11. Usage of Chemical weapons and Islamic Jurisprudence Saddam also used a mixture of nerve and mustard gas to kill about 5000 innocent civilians of Halabja in March 1988. During Iran-Iraq war, Iraq developed the talent to proliferate, store and employ chemical weapons, which include G-series nerve agents and H-series blister. These gas bombs were shot through artillery, rockets, aerial bombs, mortar shells and warheads on the scud missile variant12. Modern Muslim scholars yet to explain in a convincing way how biological , chemical and nuclear weapons of mass destruction relate to the Islamic ethics of war13. Nuclear capable Muslim states like Bangladesh, Algeria, Indonesia, Egypt, Turkey Iraq and Iran are now preferred to employ strategies and weapons, which had no earlier models in the traditional legal accords of Jihad, the Muslim academics were still arguing whether they were attuned with Islamic jurisprudence or ethics. Kazakhstan is the first Muslim nations with nuclear weapons immediately it separated from erstwhile USSR but latter it voluntarily transferred back all its nuclear weapons to Russia, and it demonstrates the Kazakhstan peaceful orientation towards nuclear orientation14. Whether the use of WMD is allowable under Islamic Jurisprudence? The present Islamic scholars are of the view that ethical usage of WMD may be categorised into three divisions, reflecting those available in other religious customs. The WMD supporters lament that acquisition and probable deployment – given the apt scenario- of WMD. Advocates of this group admit that WMD kindles the moral borders of Islamic injunctions on waging war aptly but with proper cautions. Muslim terrorists group argues that WMD is necessary to confront with their enemies. These terrorists pay little attention between the mainstream Jihad custom’s classification between non-combatants and combatants. The third group can be recognised as the Muslim WMD pacifists as they strongly oppose the acquisition and deployment of WMD which they consider as not in conformity to the Islamic ethics. However, hadith and Quran have so many rationalisations for engaging in combat, especially when non-violent initiatives fail to offer security or justice. Hence, as far as Islamic intellectual history is concerned, outright pacifism is virtually nonexistent. Use of WMDs should be avoided by Muslims as they infringe the teachings in Quran as to fight humanely. Use of WMD will have damaging or destroying impacts on natural habitat, which is not able to protect them against human attack, which is against the Quran saying namely fasad fi al-ard. (Corruption in the land)15. Any expenditure for other than constructive purposes is termed as israf and condemned by hadith and Quran and hence, a true Muslim cannot use WMD as it is meant for destructive purposes. Muslim pacifists are of the view that use of WMD is to be condemned as it creates harm not only to human beings but also to natural environment also16. Whether UK acted overwhelmingly in the War against Iraq? When it was found that Saddam had not possessed even a single WMD in his stockpiles, and this had raised many queries on the policy of war against terror by USA and UK. Supporters lament that Saddam was restrained as he suppressed about 25 million innocent civilians to awful cruelty while functioning as destabilising force in the Middle East17. There have been many theological deliberations for Muslim jihadist groups as to whether the deployment of WMD can be rationalised as per the sayings of Quran. One radical Saudi scholar made a fatwa legalising the deployment of WMD against USA and Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s deputy strongly recommended the use of WMD against USA. Abu Musab al-Suri, another al Qaeda activist criticised bin Laden for not employing WMD against USA18. Earlier in Yemeni civil war of 1963-67, Egypt was allegedly employed mustard and phosgene gas against Yemini Royalist forces. In the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, Iraq allegedly employed chemical weapons against Iran, which was banned to be used in war by international law. On March 30, 1984, UN Security Council passed a resolution censuring the deployment of chemical weapons in the Iraq-Iran war. Iraq never respected the UN resolutions and continued to employ chemical weapons against Shiite rebels in Southern Iraq and against Iran. Initially, Iran had reluctance to employ chemical weapons against Iraq, mainly due to moral qualms expressed by Muslim religious leader Ayatollah Khomeini, but later it also started to deploy chemical weapons against Iraq. However, in the late 1980s, due to immense pressures from young Muslim activists, Khomeini gave his accent to deploy chemical weapons against Iraq. Chemical weapons used in the war latter leached into the ground water and created devastation of animal and plant life in a larger province where chemical weapons were deployed ,which is against the Quran saying fasad fi al-ard. (Corruption in the land)19. The Prophet Muhammad has called for greater Jihad, which is known as the internal jihad which means the internal spiritual struggle. Thus, a jihad under Islamic jurisprudence can be explained as holy war waged in the struggle to safeguard Islam even with force if situation warrants. As per Islamic jurisprudence, a war cannot be considered as jihad if the main aim is to: to compel the people to espouse Islam, to overpower other countries to bring under their control, to take control of the region for economic benefits, to find settlement of earlier disputes and to exhibit a leader’s authority as what Saddam demonstrated in Iran and Kuwait20. The Muslim jurists and scholars’ bank upon the authority of consensus and reason and study more assiduously how to find out the regulations of al-shariah (laws of Islam) from the sayings of Holy Quran and its explanations (Hadith) and thus equip themselves for the religious way of life. One of the most intriguing questions that haunt our mind is whether al-Shariah authorises the use of biological or chemical weapons. Whether Saddam being a Muslim was right in employing chemical weapons against Iran, against innocent civilians of Sardasht and Kurds living in Halabcha region of Iraq? The use of unlawful and unconventional WMDs is not authorised by Quran as 2:190 says every Muslim should fight against his enemy, but a true Muslim should not misbehave as Allah does not have affection for the transgressors. As per Quran verse 2:205, perpetrators of harm are the destroyers of religion and hence Allah won’t love those who indulged in evildoing. Thus , if a Muslim engaged in stocking of biological , atomic and chemical weapon which is considered as cases of spreading of harm on the earth which is regarded as dishonest in Islam. As per Abu Abd Allah, it was the wishes of Holy Prophet that a true Muslim should fight for the cause of Allah, who confronts the reality of Allah, but he should always avoid deforming, enchaining or punishing or kill kids, patients suffering from illness or orphans. As per Abd Allah ibn Mas ud, the Messenger of Allah wished that one should not punish others by fire as only the Lord will punish the people with the fire. The abovementioned hadith speaks about the atmosphere at war front and the ban in employing fire arms in war zones. Further Holy Prophet’s instructions to his followers were as follows; do not engage in war for revenge, do not engage in war without acknowledging the realities, not to engage in deforming the dead soldiers of enemies, do not disregard on the well-founded truce and commitment, not to destroy plantations and trees (no environmental damage), not to engage in annihilating animals and not to involve in damaging the premises and residential buildings21. As per 8:57 of Quran, if a Muslim captures a non-Muslim in a warfare, he should teach the non-believers a lesson so that these enemies after that be aware of the mighty of a true Muslim’s power. Thus, Islam is founded on the justice, kindness, standing one’s promises and commitment and equality and as such the proliferation of WMD and their deployment are expected to do unexpected harms and annihilation of civilisation and definitely not authorised by Quran. Thus, proliferation and deployment of nuclear weapons have no standing in the culture of Quran and is totally against what Quran preaches. Jus ad bellum vs Jus in Bello in Iraq War Jus ad bellum refers to just war theory, which connotes the just reason for going to war, the purpose and reasoning for initiating a war. Under this, the main issues that would be under consideration are whether a nation poses an imminent and serious threat from its enemies? Whether all other recourses have failed? Will the action to wage a war will end in more peril in the latter period? Jus ad bellum is the direct opposite to the Jus in Bello, which refers justice practiced in a war. Jus in Bello connotes the ethics on which war is waged and focuses more significance on fighting within the well acknowledged warfare rules and regulations. Some important issues that are being considered in Jus in Bellum are whether civilian populations are deliberately directed? Whether adequate care has been taken to avoid the unnecessary casualty of civilian populations? Whether war prisoners have been treated as per warfare norms?22 Quran advocates jus ad bellum through its verses 42.40-43 which states that a true Muslim is allowed to engage in self-defence but not by violent means and just reasons for war if there is a wrongful demeanour on the part of enemy and their immoral and oppressive demeanour. 2.190 verse of the Quran acknowledges that a Muslim should engage in war if their enemies engage in aggression, and Muslims should not engage in hostilities. Thus, engagement in a war should be superseded by an aggression act by an enemy23. Muslim groups engaged in the terrorist activities distort Islamic jurisprudence to accomplish their narrow ideological or political agenda. Not every act of terrorism unleashed by a Muslim terrorist can be termed as jihad. There is clear direction in the Quran to restrain its followers from engaging in illegal violence or terrorist activities. It is to be remembered whenever a Muslim ruler directed an illegal qital, his orders were either censured or criticised as the Quran prohibits Muslims not to massacre or take the life of innocents except with just causes. However, Quran advocates the Muslims for qital by underestimating the power of the enemy by promising that one Muslim jihad fighter is equivalent to ten soldiers fighting for the perpetuation of zulum which means to safeguard one from oppression and evil, and those are the people who engage in warfare without applying their brain. A Muslim soldier is more ready to give up his life in the cause of Allah and hence, he can indulge in extraordinarily treacherous acts like terrorism or create terror among enemies. Quran also says that Shahdeed is one who expires in a legal qital and such Shahdeed will have a place in heaven without fail24. In case of Iraq war, one has to ponder over the following issues: whether flawed planning and execution of war resulted in a great number of civilian and belligerents causalities that would have been evaded. American warfare in Iraq was followed by a number of preventable miscalculations and mistakes that resulted in grave outcomes. The use of high-precision bombs and in-and-out raids carried out against insurgents in Iraq by American and UK forces were highly criticised by the advocates of jus in Bello strategy in warfare25. Since, UK and USA could not find any substantial WMD in Iraq, they called it latter as a humanist intervention. It is significant to note that such a humanitarian intervention is an obligation and not a right. It is still a valid argument, whether UK and its allies are having any right to invade Iraq to free Iraqis from the clutches of Saddam. Critics have also argued whether Saddam regime involved in the automatic massacre of a chunk of its population what Khmer Rouge done in Cambodia in the year 1970s. However, critics argued that unfortunately Saddam not involved in such a large scale massacre of his Iraqi people26. Conclusion A true Muslim cannot use WMD as it is meant for destructive purposes. Muslim pacifists are of the view that use of WMD is to be condemned as it creates harm not only to human beings but also to natural environment also. Use of WMDs should be avoided by Muslims as they infringe the teachings in Quran as to fight humanely. As per Islamic jurisprudence, a war cannot be considered as jihad as to take control of the region for economic benefits, and to exhibit a leader’s authority as what Saddam demonstrated in Iran and Kuwait. Proliferation and deployment of nuclear weapons have no standing in the culture of Quran and is totally against what Quran preaches. Hence, Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were really a threat to modern society as they wanted to deploy WMD against USA to take revenge Since, UK and USA could not find any substantial WMD in Iraq, it can be concluded that the war against Iraq has been waged against the Jus in Bello i.e. without any just causes. However , considering the past actions by Saddam in Iran and Kuwait and to prevent the use of WMD in the near future by Saddam and to save innocent Kurdish from annihilation , the decision to go war against Iraq though to be condemned but not to be censured . Bibliography Bruneau, T C & Boraz, S C, Reforming Intelligence: Obstacles to Democratic Control and Effectiveness (University of Texas Press 2007) Croddy E A & wIrtz J J, Weapons of Mass Destruction. (ABC-CLIO 2005) Elhadj E, The Islamic Shield: Arab Resistance to Democratic and Religious Reforms. (Universal Publishers 2006) en.icro.ir, ‘The Prohibited Status of WMD in Shariah accessed 12 January 2012 Gill, P& Phythian, M, Intelligence in an Unsecured World (Polity 2006) Gupta S, Theory and Reality of Democracy: A Case Study in Iraq. (Continuum International Publishing Group 2006) Hashmi, S, Ethics and Weapons of Mass Destruction: Religious and Secular Perspectives. (Cambridge University Press 2004) House of Commons Library by Foreign Office ,Paper on Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programmes deposited in the House of Commons Library by Foreign Office Minister Derek Fatchett and Doug Henderson, (The Stationary Office 1998) House of Commons, The Decision to go to War in Iraq (The Stationery Office Limited 2003) Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government, Chapter 3, para 27 Khan L. A, A Theory of International Terrorism: Understanding Islamic Militancy (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2006) Kvint V, V, Vladimir L & Kvint V, The Global Emerging Market: Strategic Management and Economics. (Taylor & Francis) Leaman O, The Quran: An Encyclopedia (Taylor & Francis 2006) Michael P O, Keete & C A J Coady, Righteous Violence: The Ethics and Politics of Military Intervention. (Melbourne University Publishing 2005) Robinson R, Both in One Trench: Saddam’s Secret Terror Documents. (Richard Dunaway 2007) Schreier F, WMD Proliferation: Reforming the Security Sector to Meet the Threat. (Potomac Books, Inc 2009) Weeks, A. The Choice of War: The Iraq War and the Just War Tradition (ABC-CILIO2009) www.bbc.co.uk, ‘Jihad’ (bbc.co.uk 3 August 2009) http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/beliefs/jihad_1.shtml > accessed 12 January 2013 14 Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government Read More