The Dilemma of State Building in Iraq - Essay Example

The dilemma of Building in Iraq: The Challenges and Difficulties in Reconstructing Iraq by Iraqi People Table of Contents Research Rationale 3 Research Objectives 4 Literature Review 5 US Invasion & Problems in Restructuring of Iraq (Methodology) 12 Conclusion 17 References 18 Bibliography 20 Research Rationale Iraq has been an important country in the international politics. The geographical location of the country makes it strategically vital in the arena of the international relations. The importance of the country has been all the more imperative because of the huge sources of oil that the country possesses. Looking in to the history of Iraq, one could easily find that the country has been time and again attacked by external forces. Even if it has not been under the outside forces, the Iraqis have been engaged in infighting to get hold of the power. The history of Iraq makes the fact pretty clear that the country is comprised of demographically and culturally different groups of people with different sects of the religion which has made the task of unified rule in Iraq all the more tough. The Kurd population in Iraq is more than 15% but they have always been ignored by the majority which has culminated a sense of distrust among the countrymen. Also, there had been infighting in between Shia and the Sunni. The above factors and the differences had its toll even when the Iraq was set for restructuring after the decline of the rule of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The Coalition Provisional Authority, that was established in Iraq after Hussein was ousted by the forces from the United States, United Kingdom and other allied powers, also faced considerable troubles as they planned to restructure the country. It was so primarily because of the fact that the country had multi – ethnicity and the mutual trust and faith among such ethnic groups have been minimal since decades. The research proposal aims to study the problems that Iraq faces in terms of restructuring by the Iraqi people. Research Objectives To analyse the political scenario of Iraq since the fall of Ottoman Empire To discuss the internal political, cultural and ethnic environment of Iraq To look into the developments of restructuring of Iraq To investigate if Iraqis could take over the work of restructuring the country after the withdrawal of the foreign forces especially that of the United States Literature Review Till the early days 20th century, the present land of Iraq was under the Ottoman Empire. It was in the time of World War I, the Iraq was aimed by the British forces. The imperialist British tried to capture Iraq for the first time in 1915 - 1916 but failed. It was in the year of 1917, the joint forces of Great Britain and the France captured the capital city of Baghdad. As it was joint invasion by the two European super powers, in order to avoid collision of power between them, the British and the French governments signed the Skyes – Picot agreement of 1916 with the imperialist Russian government in confidence to keep their influence intact in the West Asia after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Soon, under the influence of the British rule, the ‘State of Iraq’ was recognised by the League of Nations in the year of 1920 (Boesch, 1939). The experts believe that the present problems of Iraq have deep roots to the early British rule. As the British controlled Iraq, they imposed territorial boundaries of the country and approved Hashemite monarchy in Iraq. This move by the British officials was vehemently protested by various ethnic groups of the land. Being outsiders, most probably, the British authority failed to understand the internal politics of the land of the newly defined country ‘Iraq’. The country had tremendous politics among the various religious and ethnic groups like that of Kurds and Assyrians and the British administration totally ignored it. The scholars believe this was the first step that contributed immensely towards the troubles that erupted in between the Kurds and the other groups of Iraq. Also, the British forces, mostly unaware or might be, deliberately ignored the religious differences as they sided with the Sunni sect of the followers of Islam while they were in minority in the state of Iraq. Such a move created further confusion and distrusts among the Shia followers i.e. the majority. All these issues contributed towards the fight for independence by the Kurds and the Shi’ites (the followers of Shia Islam) which compelled British administration to pass requisite acts to control the movement as well as use forces. The State of Iraq achieved independence from the British rule in the year of 1931 under the repeated pleas from King Faisal. Though British lifted the administrative control from the state of Iraq, yet the imperialist power did not agree to withdraw the army bases that it had in the region. It was mainly because of the strategic location that the country of Iraq enjoyed and also because predominantly because of the extensive natural resources that the country possessed. The British were of the fear that if they provide the Iraqis with the free hand in administrative power as well as military, they could well cut supply of oil to the western world. As the power of ruling of Iraq was bestowed to the local kings, the land witnessed one after the other military coups. Experts view that such coups truly characterises the nature of Iraq. According to them, the distrust that was experienced among the Iraqis in the first half of the nineteenth century, continued even today and therefore hindered the restructuring plans of Iraq when it was transferred to the Iraqi people. King Faisal, who had been instrumental in the independence of Iraq, ruled the country only for one year as King Ghazi succeeded him after his death. King Ghazi faced repeated military coups and his rein continued till 1939. After his death in 1939, King Ghazi’s minor son Faisal II became the king and ‘Abd – Al – llah became his Regent. But again the history of coups haunted the royal throne of Iraq as within two years of King Faisal II’s rein, Rashid Ali al – Gaylani and his confidants staged a coup to oust the government led by ‘Abd – Al – llah. But soon the United Kingdom invaded Iraq again with the fear that Rashid Ali al – Gaylani would cut the oil supplies to the western world. The forces also helped restoring the government that prevailed in the pre – coup years and Nuri al-Said became the leader of the government with Faisal II as the King and ‘Abd – Al – llah as his advisor till the year of 1956. The Hashemite monarchy came to end with the military coups of the Iraqi army. The coup that ended the monarchy was known as ‘14 July Revolution’ and was led by Brigadier General Abdul Karim Qassim. The important feature during the short rule of four and half years by Brigadier General Abdul Karim Qassim was that he withdrew from the Baghdad Pact and tried to restore friendly relations with the Soviet Union. But soon Brigadier General Abdul Karim Qassim was overthrown from the power by another military coup by Colonel Abdul Salam Arif in the year of 1963. The rule of Colonel Abdul Salam Arif was also short lived as he died only three years after his access to the supreme power. After the death of Colonel Abdul Salam Arif, the Republic of Iraq was ruled by his brother Abdul Rahman Arif. But the history of the coups haunted Iraq again though this time it was no more a military coup. The next coup was organised by the Baath Party (the pan Arabic political party) in the year of 1968. Among the notable leaders of the coup, Ahmed Hasan Al-Bakir and Saddam Hussein al Tikriti were prominent. Owing to seniority, Ahmed Hasan Al – Bakir assumed the supreme post of the republic of Iraq in the year of 1969 after the overthrow of Abdul Rahman Arif but again it was short lived. In 1979, Ahmed Hasan Al – Bakir was removed from the power by one of the leaders of his own party, Saddam Hussein. In order to ensure the coup - less regime, the ambitious President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein arrested most of the senior leaders of the Baath Party and almost had free rein while ruling the country for almost 24 years. It has been regarded by the literature of Iraq that the condition of life deteriorated massively under the rule of Saddam Hussein. The government, which was predominately held by the various relatives of Saddam Hussein, was particularly hostile towards various minority groups especially that of Kurds. Also, the government of Saddam Hussein indulged with the pro – Soviet Bloc and participated in the arms race. The country of Iraq repeatedly attacked the neighbouring country of Iran with one excuse or the other and opted for massive armament policies. The world leaders noted that the condition of the human life in Iraq worsened by considerable extent and there was almost a civil war among the various ethnic and the religious groups within the country. The freedom of faith and speech was minimal during the prolonged Presidentship of Saddam Hussein. As Andrew Rathmell observed, “The failure to build a nation and the destruction of Iraq as a civil polity were accompanied by the collapse of the economy. International sanctions and economic mismanagement had a devastating effect on the economy and on society during the 1990s. Iraq under Saddam had combined the worst features of a Soviet - style command economy and an oil-rich rentier state. The situation was worsened by the fact that, by 2003, the state-run economy had essentially become a mafia-style criminal operation. Whereas, in Russia and the Balkans it took the collapse of the communist system to allow organized crime to take over much of the economy, in Iraq this had already happened during the 1990s. As a result of these political and economic developments, by 2003 the Iraqi state could be described as ‘fierce’ but deteriorated” (Rathmell, 2006). The ethnic distrust was so prevalent in the country of Iraq that when the allied forces led by the United States and the United Kingdom invaded Iraq in 2003, the minority groups cheered the foreign forces by dancing on the streets. This was the result of the initiatives of the Hussein administration that earlier propagated one after the other mass killings of the Kurds and other minorities in Iraq like that of Halabja Massacre. The literature of Iraq has many instances of oppressions that Kurds of Iraq had to face under the successive governments of Iraq. It was in the period of 1965 to 1970 that Iraqi government undertook massive program of Arabisation in the region of Kirkuk and Khanaqin (Human Rights Watch Report, 1993). These cities were dominated by the Kurdish populace and the Iraq government did not pay respect and heed to the difference of the ethnicity. The peace was initiated as Iraq agreed to grant autonomy to the Kurds. Again in the year of 1975, the Iraq launched fresh campaign of Arabisation in the northern Iraq that had Kurds as the majority. This initiative was well directed to take control of the oil fields that were owned by the Kurdish fraternity. The hostility of the campaign was too severe as it compelled more than 200,000 Kurds to shift their areas of livelihood to other parts of Iraq. Again in the year of 1988, under the reign of Saddam Hussein, Anfal attacks were launched against the Kurds that resulted in the death of almost 100,000 Kurds and devastation of around two thousand villages in the northern part of the country. It was very astonishing that though the international community repeatedly condemned the use of forces and the measures of oppression by the Iraqi administration against the Kurds, yet the United Nations did not initiate any measure. In 1991, there was another uprising among the Kurds but the aware Iraqi troops could control it before it took a massive scale. In fact, this time the Iraqi army retaliated and captured many of the areas that were under the autonomy of the Kurds. This resulted in heavy fighting and it was estimated that more than 15 lacs Kurd fled to the regions of the Iranian and the Turkish borders in addition to the deaths of around 20,000 Kurds. After such a repressive measure by Iraq, at last the United Nation Security Council condemned the Iraqi action and asked the government to allow human rights organisations to function at the affected areas. The Kurdish guerillas, under tremendous pressure, attacked the Iraqi troops in 1991 and captured Erbil and Sulaimaniyah. In order to restore Iraqi influence, the government decided to prohibit Kurds from getting the supply of food and fuel and also it stopped paying the administrative civil servants of the region. This was another fatal step by the Iraqi government as it resulted in holding elections in the region in 1992 and the Kurdistan Regional Government was established (Randal, 1998). The above facts discusses the in depth literature with respect to the reasons why it has always been tough for restructuring Iraq by the Iraqis. The previous governments never enjoyed the faith of the populace. It has also been prevalent in the writings of E. Davis. In the book, ‘Memories of State: Politics, History and Collective Identity in Modern Iraq’, the author narrated that there has always been an attempt to change the history and the culture of the country by the subsequent governments. The Baath Party governments did not at all provide for cultural pluralism and social justice. Even political participation was also not all allowed which were the key attributes of the Iraqi society. The series of interviews that Eric Davis held in order to understand the Iraqi society and administration provides an undeniable contribution in the literature of the subject (Davis, 2005). US Invasion & Problems in Restructuring of Iraq (Methodology) In the year of 2003, the allied forces led by the United States attacked the Republic of Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Along with the United States, the forces were also sent by the United Kingdom, Australia, Denmark, Portugal and Poland. Though launched the attack in 2003, the Americans drafted the plan to remove Saddam Hussein from power much earlier to 2003. In fact, the only super power of the world, United States was not satisfied with the proceedings of Iraq since the post Gulf War years. After the attack on United States on 11th September, 2001 by the terrorists, the United States declared ‘War on Terrorism’. In the same time, it was reported that Al-Qaeda used the government of Saddam Hussein as the safety valve. Prior to that, the federal government of the United States had already passed ‘Iraq Liberation Act’ in the year of 1998. With Republican George W. Bush in power, enhanced emphasis was put on the implementation of the act. As the clarification of the attack on Iraq, the United States said, “to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), to end Saddam Husseins support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people” (The White House, 2003). The then Prime Minister of the Great Britain, Tony Blair was of the view that it was ‘the final opportunity’ to disarm Iraq of the chemical, biological and the nuclear weapons that the officers of Great Britain and the United States thought to be a major threat for the peace and harmony of the world (The White House, 2003). With massive strikes by the allied forces the resistance of the Iraqi forces soon came to end as the President Hussein left the palace and went for hiding. After a fierce battle for one and half months, the allied forces had decisive victory. The notable aspect in the Iraq war of 2003 was that various factions of Iraqi population and the ethnic groups supported the allied powers along with the various neighbors of the troubled country. In fact, before the initial attack, the troops of the United States assembled at the border of Kuwait to attack Iraq. Once inside the country, the association of Kurds overwhelmingly supported the invasion much because of the long tortures that they had to face in the hands of successive Iraqi governments since ages. The Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdistan Democratic Party played instrumental role in the region of northern Iraq. Also, the Iraq National Congress joined the forces of the allied powers to uproot the regime of Saddam Hussein and his family members. Once the war ended, the next big question was that of restructuring the country. It was the fact that the rule of the Baath Party in the country since mid 1960s depleted the living condition, education, individual freedom and human rights by large. The condition of the economy was in a fix. Therefore, the allied forces had tremendous job at hand of restructuring the country. In order to facilitate the cause of restructuring, the Coalition Provisional Authority was established on April 21, 2003. The objective behind this traditional government was that to administer the funds that were raised for the restructuring Iraq. The major success of this interim government is perceived to be the arrest of the former President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein from a fox hole in the month of December of 2003 near the home town of Hussein, Tikrit. L. Paul Bremer, a United States diplomat was the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority and soon there were many accusations against Bremer and the CPA, as a whole. The government of United States thought that there might be uprising against the Coalition Provisional Authority and dissolved the body by the mid of 2004, replaced by an Iraqi interim government. The accusations against the Coalition Provisional Authority included that of financial frauds as well as that of political intentions and motifs of the government as many of the critics thought the prolonged stay of the Coalition Provisional Authority will ensure the vested interested of the Western world and especially that of Israel in the internal matters of Iraq. Also, it was observed that the Coalition Provisional Authority awarded many of the work orders of restructuring mechanisms like that of drinking water schemes or sewage schemes that were to be built under the restructuring programs to the western contractors which again aggrieved the local players. As the Coalition Provisional Authority shifted the powers of the Iraq to the interim government of Iraq, the local people got the opportunity to the transform the country. But though, it looks good from distance, the reality was hard. It was because of the age old distrust and unfaithfulness among the various ethnic group of the country. As the interim government came in to existence, the point of contention as well as confusion was the status of those oppositions of Hussein, who were in exile. The faction of the government wanted those Iraqi individuals back in the country and also looked for their view for the restructuring of Iraq. But again the accusations was that the list was not full proof as only a six member committee handpicked the list of those who were into exile. The other important matter of debate was that of de-Baathification of Iraq. After the Coalition Provisional Authority resumed power, the ill – famed Baath Party was banned in Iraq. Also, it was decided that the members and the leaders of the Baath Party who had assumed positions in the upper four tiers of the party, would not be allowed in any of the positions of the new government. But the fact was quite different as in the rein of Saddam Hussein, the membership of the Baath Party was mandatory for holding any government position. Moreover, in order to get admitted in any of the universities in those years, the students had to take the membership of the Baath Party. Therefore, the fact was that many of the members of the party did not hold position for any political belief but because it was mandatory in the country. Now, leaving such a huge population out of the government would invariably question the authenticity of the government. Also, because of such initiative, the government of Iraq would lose huge talent pool. The invasion of the United States and the following political happenings were favorable for the Kurdish population. The Kurdistan Regional Government that was established in the year of 1991 was ratified and approved by the constitution of Iraq in the year of 2005 with all its regulations and laws. This was a great success for the Kurds. In the following year of 2006, in order to prevent the problems of ruling two different administrations, the Erbil and that of Sulaimaniya were amalgamated. But these long awaited measures resulted in the dissent among the Turkmen. The ethnic group demanded that Kurd’s, having much lesser population in the modern country of Iraq, were getting proportionately higher importance than the Turkmen. In the year of 2004, UNPO declared, “The Iraqi Interim Governing Council, with the directions of the coalition forces, has been favoring the two Kurdish Parties. They were given a leading role in the establishment of the Iraqi Interim Government which was neither proportional to their population nor their presence in the Iraqi society. In contrast, the intentional exclusion of the Turkmens from the political process in post-Saddam Iraq caused a deep shock and suspicions for the Iraqi people and the Turkmens. This short-sighted political arrangement between the American Government and our Kurdish brothers was not a practical proposition to implement”. The group maintained, “We emphasize it again that Iraqs new constitution ought to be democratic, respectful of the United Nations and international laws, protecting individual and ethnic rights of all the people of Iraq. Drafting a new Iraqi constitution and its implementation bring great responsibilities to our Arabs, Kurds, Turkmens, Assyrians, Caldeans, and all of the groups in the country. We, the Turkmens, want to play a more prominent role in the restructuring of a free, just, peaceful, and stable Iraq”. These statements make it very clear that problems of Iraq are far from over as there still lies the facets of injustice and oppression (UNPO, 2004). Conclusion The restructuring of Iraq is a major task for all the concerned quarters involved with the country. The international bodies are providing requisite funds and external supports e.g. humanitarian assistance to rebuild the country. But the prime initiative has to be taken by the government of Iraq along with the general public. The history of the country suggests that there has always prevailed fair amount of mutual distrust among the various ethnic and religious groups. Therefore, it is the daunting challenge for the government to unify all the lobbies together for the development of the troubled country. Many research scholars are of the view that it is almost impossible for the Iraqis to rebuild the government themselves. This school of thought indirectly calls for external power to restructure the country. But it should be remembered that the experience with the external powers have not benefitted Iraq absolutely. The latest example was that of Coalition Provisional Authority where many of the accusations came up relating to the financial frauds and distributions of contract orders only to the western companies. Rather, it would be prudent that the country of Iraq should be left with that of the citizens of Iraq and they would decide the fate of the nation despite ethnic, religious and cultural differences. References Boesch, H. El-’Iraq. University of Zurich, 1939. Davis, E., 2005. Memories of State: Politics, History and Collective Identity in Modern Iraq. University of California Press. Human Rights Watch Report, 1993. Introduction. Genocide in Iraq: The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds. Rathmell, A., 2006. Planning post-conflict reconstruction in Iraq: What can we learn? Rand. [Online] Available at: http://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/2006/RAND_RP1197.pdf [Accessed April 15, 2010]. Randal, J. C. After Such Knowledge, What Forgiveness?: My Encounters with Kurdistan, Westview Press, 1998. The White House, 2003. President Bush Meets with Prime Minister Blair. News & Policies. [Online] Available at: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030131-23.html [Accessed April 15, 2010]. The White House, 2003. President Discusses Beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Operation Iraqi Freedom. [Online] Available at: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030322.html [Accessed April 15, 2010]. UNPO, 2004. The Iraqi Liberation and Turkmens Hopes and Disappointments. The Unrepresented Nations and People’s Organisation. [Online] Available at: http://www.unpo.org/content/view/1724/236/ [Accessed April 15, 2010]. Bibliography International Crisis Group, 2003. War in Iraq: What’s Next for the Kurds? Middle East Report. International Crisis Group, 2003. War in Iraq: Political Challenges after the Conflict. Middle East Report. Lugar, R. G., 2003. Iraq: Meeting the Challenge, Sharing the Burden, Staying the Course. Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate. Read More