Causes of Inter-state Conflicts Between U.S. and Iraq - Coursework Example

Causes of Inter Conflicts Between U.S. and Iraq Introduction The US-Iraq conflicts can be traced back during the First Gulf War, when, in a literal manner the US took over United Kingdom in commanding Kuwait’s sovereignty (Atif & Salim, 1993). Being a superpower nation, the US deployed a strong military force with the aim of preventing Iraqi’s attempt in claiming territory ownership. It must be known that resource wars over possession of oil reserves and the political effects attached to it is the reason why oil remains the leading cause of US-Iraq conflict. Due to Iraqi’s invasion into Kuwait, the UN Secretary States ordered its withdrawal by imposing economic sanctions, which was aided by the use of military blockade and air embargo. This gave George Bush the power to forcefully eject Iraq out of Kuwait. This followed with an issuance of an ultimatum on29th November 1990 by the Secretary Council that gave the US the ability of using all means necessary (Cashman et al 300) in ensuring international peace is restored. To effectively understand the major reasons that led to US-Iraq conflicts it is important to analyze the US global grand strategy, its main mission in the Middle East and the major interests that were effective during the Bush administration. This understanding plays a critical role in unveiling the reality behind the existing US Middle East Policy and how the region influences the American economy (Louis, 2009). The grand strategy gives empirical evidence and a proper understanding on why the Bush government used all means possible in strategically controlling the global hegemony (Simon, 1991). after the 9/11 attack, a strategy of preventing wars as illustrated in the Bush doctrine and the 2002 National Security Strategy was formulated. The ideology behind this formulation was to get as many nations as possible to support the US in the move to eliminate terrorists. This meant that any country that was not in agreement with this strategy was actually against US and therefore was supporting terror activities. This, in real sense was a threat in favor of the American government’s global strategy. However, due to powerful international laws and regulations, the priority was to rely on diplomacy and only introduce military force secretly because it was an already established strategy of hegemony. In this strategy, the US was keen at protecting the world’s biggest oil reserves, which were mainly found around the Persian Gulf. It has to be known that oil is a key resource in the current human life. It is very important to the survival of a superpower military. Most Middle East nations were against this strategy and thus the only effective way to get access through massive funding of Israeli missions. The mainspring of war between the US and Iraq was largely after the 9/11 attack. Even though Iraq was never part of act, as a Muslim country based in the Middle East, it was seen as potential threat to the US. Since there had been many attempts of launching an attack way before the 9/11 incidence, the US took that as a chance to invade the Middle East, especially Iraq so that it can accomplish its oil interests. It did so because there was an increase in oil demand in the American Market, which meant that its dependence on oil imports was the only option. With Iraq being the second largest oil reservoir in the whole world, it remained the potential savior. Having known Saddam Hussein as a dictator, it was very difficult for the US to even get a drop of the oil because even if the US was to use sanctions, all it meant was that Iraq would peacefully enjoy her oil riches without sharing with the rest of the world. Having sensed this, both Iraq and Iran quickly isolated themselves from the dual containment policies meant to be imposed on them by the US (Sherle, 2003) Oil conflicts between the US and Iraq was as result of resource wars in which the US has always been pictured to use force through deployment of military personnel in order to control the oil reserves. It is very clear that, through petro-aggression, the US has shown the ability to control key influential leaders like the former president Sadam Hussein which made them susceptible of engaging into risky foreign policy adventurism. As illustrated earlier on, the US, upon understanding the behavior of such influential leaders, it had to use all possible means in winning false trust. During the George Bush reign, there was a clear contractual agreement between Sadam and Bush, where they the US secretly sneaked oil out of the ever fighting East nations under the watch of Sadam in exchange of favors. To act as a cover up, frequent fights between Iraq and Iran were initiated with the US acting as the savior. This, in real sense can be referred to as the externalization of civil wars. As already stated, financing was used as a cover up plan. During such periods, the two nations had negative relations due to power-politics behavior. As a use of force, Iraq was sandwiched among problems that included being disarmed, threatened by economic sanctions, mandatory weapon inspection by the UN and two non-fly zones. The move was meant to bring an end to the already existing territorial issues that Iraq had with her neighbors including Iran and Kuwait as well as its major aim of ending the already established American influence in the Middle East. This is a true illustration of the realism theory of International Relations. There is true use of force since there is no accountability or force of command. The only thing applicable in such situations is an individual’s State power. In the US-Iraq conflict, the US had great power and thus used all her might in defense through the use of military, imposing economic sanctions and influencing international politics. The UN had false assumptions on Iraqi’s nuclear weapon capability. It had secretly enriched itself nuclear weapons. Even though there was claim that Saddam had ordered full destruction of the nuclear weapons, there was little documentation to show proof thus making it possibly viable for it to reserve. The most shocking reality is that even though the UN demanded Iraq to declare its weapons, out of the 12,500 page weapon declaration documents, 8,500 of those pages were literally removed by the US before being released to the public. The BBC News, “Little new in Iraq declaration”, 19 December 2002 clearly indicates that by secretly withholding 70% of the documents, the US a key role in the cause of international crisis (John & Spencer, 2003). As a matter of fact, there was a secret deal that Iraq never knew its full purpose. The US Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld was behind the plan of equipping Iraq with the dangerous biological weapons. In 1983, on behalf of the US government, the Defense Secretary held a private meeting with Saddam Hussein with the purpose of selling the nuclear weapons to Iraq in exchange for oil reserves (Scott Ritter. (2005). The nuclear weapons were meant to enable Iraq conquer her neighbors to allow effective oil theft by the US. However, before the whole world, the US went ahead to declare that Iraq had illegal possession of nuclear weapons. Since the United Nations was fully in favor of America’s accusation, the world believed. This was a true lie. With evidence that Iraq held the largest oil deposits worldwide, this can be a justification as to why there has been frequent misunderstanding between the Us and Iraq (John, 2003). Conclusion Through the grand strategy, it is clear that oil demand in the American market was a major contributor of the frequent wars between the US and Iraq. America was concerned about protecting her dollar from depreciating against other world major currencies. The only avenue to protect it was through acquiring oil using all means possible. While majority of Americans end up describing Bush and his government as creative strategists, the reality is, they were international conmen whose interest was to gain access the oil reserves, make profits out of it and sell the rest to the anxious citizens. the world has ended up picturing Middle East nations just because of terror attacks and America’s strategies in using it as an avenue to invade such countries, initiate war between neighboring companies, portray themselves as good Samaritans who bring in relief services but behind the scenes, they leave such countries poor by siphoning oil out of them. The UN was actually in favor of the US because it made sure Iraq was left to blame for the attack seven when its aim is to promote peace and human rights. These attacks raise concerns about the effectiveness of International laws that are supposed to restrict other nations from using realism theory. International public relations are meant to foster unity and ensure every member state has equal representation. References Atif Kubursi and Salim Mansur (1993) ‘‘Oil & the Gulf war: an American Century or a ‘New World Order’?’ Arab Studies Quarterly, Vol. 15 (4):1-18. John B. Judis and Spencer Ackerman, (2003, June 30). "The Selling of the Iraq War," The New Republic. John S. Duffield (2003). “Oil And The Iraq War: How The United States Could Have Expected To Benefit, And Might Still,” MERIA Journal, Vol. 9(2). Louis Fisher. (2009). “Deciding on War against Iraq: Institutional Failures.” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 118 (3). Scott Ritter. (2005). Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of Americas Intelligence Conspiracy, London: I. B. Tauris. Sherle R. Schwenninger, (2003) "Revamping American Grand Strategy, World Policy Journal, Vol.20 (3). Simon Bromley. (1991). Oil and American Hegemony, Polity Press. Read More