The Causes And Consequences Of The Iraq War Politics Essay

First and foremost, this paper will explain and discuss why Iraq was invaded by the US-led coalition. In fact, there were many justifications provided by the US administration which were taken as a pretext to invade and occupy Iraq. US Administration presented before and after the fall Baghdad a number of justifications to persuade the world that war on Iraq was necessary. The war on Iraq was launched on March 19, 2003 to remove Saddam regime and to benefit from Iraq oil. US administration also claimed that it wants to dissemination freedom and democracy in the Middle East area. Before the war, the governments of the U.S. and the UK claimed that Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to their security and that of their coalition allies. But United Nations weapons inspectors found no evidence of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Many theories confirmed that US arguments were trying to secure Iraqi oil reserves which was the main cause for invasion. This war was main causes that oil and gas industry rose on the world economy and the growing importance of oil in maintaining America’s hegemonic position in international relations.

On the other hand, the paper will show what were consequences this war on Arabian Gulf States. In this paper, these points will be illustrated in detail, in a trial to unveil one aspect of this picture. The questions will be analyzed in details on main causes of US invasion of Iraq in 2003 as well as consequences of war for the Arabian Gulf states.

Causes of US Invasion of Iraq

Remove Saddam’s Dictatorship

Indeed, the western world headed by US participated in the coalition against Iraq under not grounds; of course there had been more than one reason but other than those reasons which were announced to the entire globe. It was true to know the fact that more than 150 Members of Parliament have signed a Commons motion tabled by the Labour backbencher, condemning any attack that didn’t have the backing of the United Nations.

Then; whey European countries and United States legalized for invasion of Iraq. In other words, Saddam really was a very bad man indeed and should not be trusted an inch.(Nick Assinder,2002). With these words, United Kingdom may have participated in the war against Iraq out of special impressions against Saddam’s regime, regardless of any facts he might be faced with which did not support his case.

Self Defense

The United Stated invaded and interfered Iraq with self defense claims. The United States did not have clear right to self-defense. Although, the administration confirmed that it was entitled to defend itself against any potential attack may take place in the future. President Bush displayed Saddam Hussein’s regime, in his speech to the United Nations on September 12, 2002, as “a grave and gathering danger,”. Explaining that persistent Saddam’s regime had mass destruction weapons , and named it “outlaw regime”. He provided such weapons sent to terrorists (Adam P. Tait. 2005).

Furthermore, the US administration also said that the United States had a right to self-defense on the grounds because the Iraqi regime was a link and relation to Al Qaeda. US administration confirmed that the organization was responsible for the attacks on the United States in September 11, 2001. Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations Security Council in February 2003that Iraq protected a terrorist cell headed by Abu Musab Zarqawi. Powell also added that Iraq and Al Qaeda leaders had met about eight times at the least since the early 1990s along with had a link to Ansar al-Islam, an Islamist militia group was based in a lawless part of northeast Iraq.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Second false allegation was that Iraq has chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs as well as its development of longrange missile. It was also alleged that Iraq supported terrorism, were the justifications put forward for forcibly disarming Iraq. However, weapons of mass destruction were not used by Iraqi forces, on the first hand and UN inspectors did not discover any weapons of mass destructions before the war or even US forces while the war. U.S. intelligence suggested that such chemical and biological weapons were dispersed and armed with established command and control. Observers saw that U.S. forces toppled military structure of Iraq and the authorization to use such weapons. Others saw that Iraq had little incentives to use such weapons, for several reasons: they had limited military utility against U.S. forces, which moved fast; Iraq had rare delivery options given to U.S. and allied forces; as well as use of such weapons would convert world’s opinion against Iraq. While many observers saw that the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction would increase the closer U.S. forces got to Baghdad, and then decrease once they were in the city (Raymond W. Copson,2003)

War on Terrorism

Although the Bush administration has justified its invasion against Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. It claimed that Saddam Hussein supported terrorist groups in the Middle East. Although, they did not focus their attacks on U.S. targets instead of being part of the war on the terrorist network. This allegation was not considered justified strongly and attacking of the United States still an unprovoked invasion of Iraq. It detracted from US administration and actually cause more retaliatory terrorism against U.S. targets. Furthermore, invading Iraq would increase radical Islamists around the world, acting as a virtual recruiting poster for al-Qaeda and destabilizing friendly regimes in the Middle East. Bush administration wanted to put all its resources and efforts for fighting the foe enemy at the gates “al-Qaeda.”. In fact, Iraq invasions had had the very predictable effect of enhancing the position of Al Queda and other Islamist groups throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds. None of such causes were credible for invading Iraq at that time and even now (Brand Howard, 2004).

An international law permitted nations to use military force to prevent genocide or other humanitarian catastrophes. However, when Saddam Hussein has committed horrific acts against his own people in the past, the U.S. has not argued that intervention is necessary to address continuous crimes against humanity (Michael, C. Dorf, 2003).

Economic Benefit

On the other side, main cause to invade Iraq was economic benefit throughout oil resources. United State of America intended to invade Iraq in spite of opposition from world community because there were not motivations or main causes to do so. According to Duffield said that “effect such a move might have on Iraqi oil production and exports.” Iraq had about potential to produce big volumes of oil than it was producing prior to the invasion. The low production was due to a set of historic circumstances and conditions that decreased production of Iraqi oil including the devastation caused by the Iran-Iraq war, the first Gulf War, and the UN sanctions that followed that war. Saddam also decreased oil exports at various times as a way to attempt to gain leverage over American and Israeli foreign policy.

Fig. 1: Shows oil production in Iraq and consumption from 1980 – 2007

Source: Energy Information Administration, Iraq Energy Data.

By the time the war began, it had become clear that the fastest way to increase oil outputs of Iraq as a result of lift UN sanctions, increase investment in the Iraqi oil patch, and prevent Iraq from manipulating oil prices. Concerning with political purposes were to remove and topple Saddam from power. There are a number of benefits that America could have expected to gain by invading Iraq. First, increasing exports of Iraqi oil could be a stabilizing force on world oil markets by helping to meet the growth in the demand for oil in the near future. Second, control over oil resources in Iraq, hence it would decrease America’s reliance on Kingdom of Saudi Arabia oil due to the Saudi benefits from American interests such as investment, infrastructure etc (JESSE W KLINE, 2007).

Consequences of War on Gulf States

After US invasion of Iraq in 2003, most Gulf States began to enhance to their relations with United States to ensure their position and fear from US attacks.

Fig. 2: Shows map of Gulf Arabian States.

US-Kuwait Relations and Cooperation on Iraq

Kuwaitis are optimistic about their future because Saddam Hussein became out of power in Iraq. Kuwait and Iraq have reestablished diplomatic relations. Kuwait began to support and build its military forces and army. It began to rebuild its relations with Iran. During 1990s, Kuwait’s preoccupation with the Iraqi threat had led it to steadily improve relations with Iran. About 25% of Kuwait’s population are Shiite Muslims, the sect that predominates in Iran, and Kuwaiti leaders have always feared that this community could be manipulated by Iran. After Iraqi threat gone, Kuwaiti leaders are growing more wary of Iran(Kenneth Katzman. 2005).

Cooperation with the Global War on Terrorism. After the September 11, 2001 attacks, Kuwait moved to block the accounts of suspected Al Qaeda activists in Kuwait. US State Department says it has established an office at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor to monitor Islamic charities such as the Islamic Heritage

Revival. In May 2005, Kuwait arrested twenty suspected supporters of Iraq’s Sunni Arab-led insurgency, but they were let out of jail pending appeal (Kenneth Katzman. 2005).

Economic Policy. U.S. officials persuaded Kuwait to open its economy to foreign investment in order to attract technology and expand the private sector. Since 2004, Prime Minister Shaykh Sabah has visited several east Asian nations in a purpose of economic reform. Kuwait’s state-owned oil industry still accounts for 75% of government income and 90% of export earnings. The United States imports about 260,000 barrels per day in crude oil from Kuwait, equal to about 3% of U.S. oil imports. Kuwait’s proven crude oil reserves are about 95 billion barrels, about 10% of total proven world oil reserves and enough for about 140 years at current production levels. On June 8, 2005, several energy firms owned US operated in Kuwait such as Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, and Conoco Phillips cooperated to raise oil Production in Kuwait about 400,000 barrels per day (Kenneth Katzman. 2005).

Qatar

In comparison to Kuwait, Qatar takes a more unfixed stance about its cooperation with U.S. Qatar sought to build developed country in the region based on democracy and freedom of speech. Qatar has invested huge amounts of money in becoming a regional education center, partnering with major American universities such as Cornell, Texas A&M, George­town, Virginia Commonwealth, and others to establish interactive educational facilities in Doha.

In consideration of its commitment to turn to the United States for military protection and edu­cational advancement. Qatar has become a significant foreign policy tool which is Al-Jazeera channel. The most common news coverage of al-Jazeera has great improvement between Qatar’s relations with the United States and with its Arab neighbors. U.S. officials have annoyed that al-Jazeera presents tapes from Osama bin Ladin, as well as its news coverage of the Coalition’s war against Iraq and of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is worthy mentioning that, the war on Iraq caused to enhance Qatar’s position with US. Most important that US base located in Doha is the big evidence on strong relations between Qatar and US (Jon B. Alterman. 2007).

United Arab Emirates

As regarding U.S relationship with UAE after US invasion on Iraq 2003. it was clearly that the UAE govern­ment seeks to keep many actions and policies with US. Close defense and intelligence cooperation increased between the United States and the UAE, but the UAE has strongly expanded its commercial ties to Asia as well as balancing against a seemingly mercurial U.S. policy. For instance, Dubai, sought deep ties to China; bilateral trade is now more than $10 billion yearly (Jon B. Alterman. 2007).

Conclusion

This paper examined the main causes and pretexts taken by US to invade Iraq showing evidences, proofs and facts on the tongues of its officials and political experts. The US combined and formed coalition to claim that the invasion was legal. It justified that it went to the Iraq for liberty and human rights. There is no doubt that the invasion was not legal due to UN Security Council didn’t express expressly and give authorization to use force under its resolutions. The acts against Iraq resulted troublesome dilemma for the United Nations and the Security Council and weakened its position and powers due to illegal invasion on Iraq. All allegations and claims of US Administration were totally false in consideration of facts and evidences provided by leading political experts and officials.

The US invasion of Iraq removed a brutal dictator from power and led to open new stage of positive political and economic change in Iraq and also Gulf states. It is clearly that Gulf Countries Council governments seek a US -Iranian friendly establishment. Three states Kuwait, UAE and Qatar have taken different approaches to meet their own security needs, seeking different degrees of identity with U.S. interests and actions. Although these countries share many threat perceptions with the United States, it would be a mistake to overstate the commonality of interests.