Military Intervention since the End of the Second World War - Essay Example

Britain can be proud of its legacy of military intervention since the end of the Second World War. Do you agree? Formore than three hundred years, Britain was the most powerful naval power in the world and it is through this power that it was able to dominate over a quarter of the globe. The power of Britain was unrivalled by any other nation and this ensured the security of not only the nation, but also of all its colonies and protectorates. Its ability to project its military power was essential in ensuring that it was able to influence events all over the world because it was confident in its ability to punish those parties that went against its dictates. However, towards the end of the nineteenth century, Britain had begun declining and this made it more and more difficult to project its military power. The two world wars made the situation even worse because it ensured the formal decline of Britain as the world’s preeminent power and this was in favour of the United States and the Soviet Union. After the Second World War, Britain has intervened militarily in various conflicts across the world and this has created a situation where there have been questions concerning its legacy. This paper seeks to show that while for the most part Britain’s military interventions after the Second World War are a legacy to be proud of, there are instances where some interventions have been misguided and have not been in the interests of the British people. One of the most important military interventions made by the British military after the Second World War was in the Greek Civil War where it helped in the stabilising the country after the Nazi German withdrawal. The political turmoil that followed this withdrawal made Greece to become a nation divided, where some groups supported the government and monarchy while others supported communist groups that wished to take over the government of the country (Goulter, 2014). Greece had for many years faced a lot of turmoil, first under Ottoman rule and later after independence where it had a lot of uncertainty concerning the type of government that they would have liked. However, while this was the case, the Nazi occupation of the country had made it possible for those groups disillusioned with the monarchy to achieve prominence and once the Germans withdrew, these groups often opted for the ending of the monarchy and the acceptance of communist rule. The ability of these rebels to take over the government through force was quite real because they received support, albeit secretly, from communist countries in Europe, such as the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Under these circumstances, British intervention was crucial in ensuring that the national government and its supporters were provided with the aid necessary to ensure that they help off the rebels. Moreover, the British intervention in Greece was essential in preventing a communist takeover of the country which would have meant that Greece would have ended up suffering from underdevelopment as a result of being in the communist bloc (Iatrides and Rizopoulos, 2000). The strength of the Greek government would not have been enough to ensure a decisive victory over the rebels and this is the reason why British intervention should be fully appreciated because Greece would have otherwise descended into instability. This is an important legacy of British military intervention because it brought about a situation where it was possible for Greece to take the first steps into becoming a modern, democratic state. The British military intervention in Northern Ireland is another incidence of a situation where Britain helped to re-establish order within a troubled state. Northern Ireland had come to be almost completely divided over the matter of whether to join the Republic of Ireland or to remain a part of the United Kingdom and this created a situation where there was conflict between loyalists, who were predominantly protestant, and Irish nationalists, a majority of who were Catholics. The open discrimination of Catholics in Northern Ireland by Protestants made the situation even worse and this lead to a rise of sectarian violence in the state that would last for some three decades (White, 1989). The parties involved in the conflicts tended to have massive local support where they were a majority and this made the whole of Northern Ireland fairly unstable because it was not known who would end up being the victim of attacks from one side of the conflict or the other. There was also a situation where it was difficult for justice to be given to Catholics because Protestants dominated almost all administrative, judicial, and law enforcement institutions. Under these circumstances, it was quite difficult for Catholics to live in peace in Northern Ireland because they were not longer secure in what was essentially a one-sided conflict. British military intervention came at the right time because it helped to bring about a semblance of order within the region because without this intervention, the situation in Northern Ireland would have ended up becoming much worse (FitzGerald, 2006). The military presence in the region ensured that there was a lessening of the tensions between Catholics and Protestants and while it did not bring immediate peace, this intervention made it possible for political forces to get on the negotiating table. However, there were reports of some members of the British military who often took the Protestant side of the conflict; terrorising Catholics and in some cases killing some of them in cold blood. Despite this, the military presence allowed for the development of a semblance of normalcy which would not have been possible had all security been left in the hands of a Protestant led government that put its own interests first before those of the entire state. The Falklands War is one of the most impressive military interventions made by Britain in a bid to protect not only its interests overseas, but also to show its sovereignty. This war was started by Argentina which claimed the Falklands Islands as part of its territory that had been illegally occupied by Britain (Caviedes, 1994). The Argentinean invasion for the most part caught Britain by surprise and it required a swift response in order to make sure that Britain’s overseas territories were protected against invasion. While at the beginning of the war, Britain’s ability to project its power was underestimated, with some deeming it a second rate global power that did not have the influence that it had once had, the British military proved its critics wrong. The ten week conflict with Argentina made it possible for the world to realise that Britain was still a country to be reckoned with militarily and that it had the capability to protect its interests across the globe. While this may have been the case, the Argentinean government attempted to portray the British military intervention as an imperial power that wanted to retain control over the territory of another state. The military intervention ensured that the Falklands Islands remained under British control and that the local population, most of which was descended from British settlers from the mid-nineteenth century, was kept safe. Since the majority of the islands’ population wished to remain under British rule, Britain’s military intervention was essential in ensuring that their wishes were respected and this allowed for the people of these islands to continue living their lives as subjects of the United Kingdom (Tulchin, 1987). Without Britain’s military intervention, it is likely that the people of British descent in the islands would have faced a lot of discrimination from an extremely nationalist regime in Argentina and this discrimination would have brought about a loss of their rights as inhabitants of the islands. Among the most significant interventions by the British military was in the Gulf War after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and this war was fought after the aggressive actions taken by Iraq against its much smaller neighbour due to claims that Kuwait had been a part of Iraq during the Ottoman period (Frank, 1991). The Iraqi invasion can be considered to have been part of a plan to get its hands on the massive oil wealth possessed by Kuwait and this would have allowed for more income for this country. However, it also made it possible for the people of Kuwait to undergo a lot of suffering and this in such a manner that for most of them, their lives were turned upside-down. Not only were soldiers and civilians killed during this conflict, but there was massive displacement of people as they attempted to get away from the Iraqi advance. Therefore, in order to prevent a massacre of the Kuwaiti population as well as the loss of sovereignty for this state, Britain chose to intervene in the conflict in a bid to ensure that the Iraqi advance was brought to a halt. The halting of Iraqi forces in Kuwait was of paramount importance because it would allow for the people of this country to get the necessary aid to ensure that they were able to live comfortably. Furthermore, British intervention alongside its allies, forced Iraq to completely withdraw from Kuwait and brought about a situation where the latter’s sovereignty was restored. Without British intervention, it is quite possible that Kuwait would have ended up as a province of Iraq where it would have been exploited and its people oppressed and treated as second-class citizens. Moreover, Iraqi forces would have most likely committed worse atrocities than they had already committed in Kuwait and it would have only been a matter of time before Iraq sought another country to invade. It is essential to note that British intervention in this case was done for humanitarian purposes, where there was a need to protect the people of Kuwait from the brutality of the Iraqi forces (Husain, 1995). In this case, intervention allowed for Britain to be seen as a state that promoted the sovereignty of other states and one that would not tolerate the arbitrary measures taken by some governments against others, and this allowed for it to be seen as a significant player in the politics of the globe. The British intervention in Afghanistan was instrumental in the overthrow of the oppressive Taliban regime and in the restoration of democracy in this country and this was done alongside the United States, after the 9/11 attacks that had led to the deaths of thousands. The choice of the British to invade Afghanistan was done to ensure that those individuals who had provided a safe haven for al Qaeda, namely the Taliban, were overthrown and their influence over Afghanistan brought to an end. The invasion of Afghanistan was part of the war on terror which was launched in a bid to ensure that terrorist attacks in the scale of 9/11 were never conducted again. Moreover, the British military invasion was designed to ensure that the people of Afghanistan were given an opportunity to enjoy their rights and freedoms without the oppression that they had suffered under the Taliban (Sheerin, 2009). The ability of the British military to use its power not only for the sake of furthering the nation’s interests but also for the sake of the people of Afghanistan is highly commendable because it gave hope to a people who had lost all hope of ever shaping the future of their own country. Thus, military intervention in Afghanistan, despite the massive loss of life among British servicemen, was essential for the national security of the country because it allowed for the pursuit of al Qaeda and its affiliates to their base of operations where their power was considerably reduced (Gall, 2011). It is also essential to note that British intervention allowed for the securing of the next generation of Afghan children from getting involved in terrorist activities as well as harmful traditional practices that would have otherwise been their way of life. Therefore, the intervention of the British military in this country made it possible for the people of Afghanistan to live their lives in a relatively better manner to the one that they were subjected to under some five years under Taliban rule. Despite the successes that have been made through British military interventions after the Second World War, there have also been instances where they have ended up being strategic blunders. This is especially the case with its involvement in Libya during the Arab Spring that led to the overthrow and murder of Muammar Gaddafi. While Gaddafi may have been an autocratic ruler, he had helped Libya become more stable and had allowed this country a level of development that could not be rivalled in the North African region (Roberts, 2011). His overthrow has led to a situation where Libya has sunk into sectarian and tribal violence that was for the most part unseen under his rule and this can be considered to have been a blunder on the part of British forces that participated under the NATO mandate. The development of Libya into what can only be considered to be a failed state is a situation that can be blamed on Britain and its allies in their military intervention because if it had not taken place, then the minor uprising against the Gaddafi government would have been swiftly dealt with and the country would not have fallen into the state in which it is (Macak and Zamir, 2012). It is such strategic blunders as happened in Libya and to some extent Iraq that has led to a situation where it has become difficult for these countries to return to a state of normalcy, with divisions being so serious that they have led to the ineffective delivery of services and security by governments because even the administrative and security employees have come to be divided along sectarian and tribal lines. The discussion above has sought to show that while for the most part Britain’s military interventions after the Second World War are a legacy to be proud of, there are instances where some interventions have been misguided and have not been in the interests of the British people. It has shown that among the most important military interventions made by the British military after the Second World War was in the Greek Civil War where it helped in the stabilising the country after the Nazi German withdrawal. Moreover, the British military intervention in Northern Ireland is also incidence of a situation where Britain helped to re-establish order within a troubled state. In addition, the Falklands War is one of the most impressive military interventions made by Britain in a bid to protect not only its interests overseas, but also to show its sovereignty. Furthermore, the discussion has shown that the British military intervened in the Gulf War after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in order to save the latter’s sovereignty from being taken away by the invading force. It is also noteworthy that the British intervention in Afghanistan was instrumental in the overthrow of the oppressive Taliban regime and in the restoration of democracy in this country. Finally, the discussion has attempted to show that despite the successes that have been made through British military interventions after the Second World War, there have also been instances where they have ended up being strategic blunders as seen through the Libyan crisis after the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. References Caviedes, C.N. 1994, "Conflict over the Falkland Islands: A never-ending story? Latin American Research Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 172–87. FitzGerald, G. 2006, "The 1974–5 Threat of a British Withdrawal from Northern Ireland." Irish Studies in International Affairs, vol. 17, pp. 141–150. Frank, A.G. 1991, "Third World War in the Gulf: A New World Order." Political Economy Notebooks for Study and Research, no. 14, pp. 5–34. Gall, C. 2011, "Losses In Pakistani Haven Strain Afghan Taliban". The New York Times. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/01/world/asia/01taliban.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [accessed 09 Feb. 2015] Goulter, C.J.M. 2014, “The Greek Civil War: A National Army’s Counter-insurgency Triumph.” Journal of Military History, vol.78, no. 3, pp. 1017-55. Husain, T. 1995. Kuwaiti Oil Fires: Regional Environmental Perspectives. Oxford: BPC Wheatons Ltd. Iatrides, J.O. & Rizopoulos, N.X. 2000, "The International Dimension of the Greek Civil War." World Policy Journal, pp. 87-103. Macak, K. & Zamir, N. 2012, "The Applicability of International Humanitarian Law to the Conflict in Libya." International Community Law Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 423–429. Roberts, H. 2011, "Who said Gaddafi had to go?". London Review of Books, vol. 33, no. 22, pp. 8–18. Sheerin, J. 2009, "As it happened: Afghan election 2009". BBC News. [Online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8209279.stm [accessed 09 Feb. 2015] Tulchin, J.S. 1987, "The Malvinas War Of 1982: An Inevitable Conflict That Never Should Have Occurred." Latin American Research Review, vol. 22, no. 3, pp 123–141. White, R.H. 1989, “From Peaceful Protest to Guerrilla War: Micro mobilization of the Provisional Irish Republican Army.” The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 94, no. 6, pp. 1277–1302 Read More