The American Invasion of Iraq - Literature review Example

The US Invasion of Iraq Introduction The present work concerns itself with the criticism levelled against the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq, by realists. Several arguments proffered by the realists, in this regard, have been analysed. Moreover, the outcomes of this invasion and the setbacks suffered by the US, on account of this invasion, have been discussed. Furthermore, the US lost a number of its troops in Iraq, which engendered considerable criticism in the US. In addition, Muslims at large, developed animosity towards the US policy adopted Vis –a – Vis Iraq. As such, the realists have argued that the US has embarked upon a policy of unilateralism, due to its undisputed superpower status. In this manner, the criticism levelled by realists against the US invasion of Iraq has been elaborated upon in the sequel. In the year 2003, the United States invaded Iraq and ousted the Saddam Hussein led government. This military action was carried out, in order to end the authoritarian regime in Iraq. The US army occupied major Iraqi cities, resulting in a guerrilla uprising against their protracted occupation of Iraq (Cole). The realists contend that the posturing of the US tends to depict it as an uncontrolled super power, which provokes a number of underprivileged and angry persons to indulge in antagonistic behavior. The factor to be taken cognizance of is not the capacity to cause damage but the motivation to indulge in such activities. The US has the prowess to not only wage a war in Iraq but also to take terrorism head on. Nevertheless, it has become evident that the response to the war in Iraq has diminished the effectiveness of the US efforts against terrorism. The perceived uncontrolled actions of the US could prove extremely beneficial to terrorist organizations on the lookout for recruits (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). The reasons for this invasion arose in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks against the US. The Bush administration accused Saddam Hussein of having developed weapons of mass destruction and biological weapons, which could pose a serious threat to the US. Moreover, these weapons could undermine security and peace in the region. The Bush administration also alleged that Saddam Hussein was promoting international terrorism and sponsoring cross-border terrorism (Thomas Jr, Thomas, & Poppen, 2004. Pp.79 – 80). The Bush administration claimed that invasion of Iraq was indispensable in deposing Saddam Hussein and thereby eliminating the threat to the US from weapons of mass destruction. Therefore, Bush felt that a rapid attack against Iraq was essential (Lee, 2007. P.132). Body The neoclassical realists argue that the United States has the ability to mobilise its resources rapidly to demonstrate its military prowess and to overpower other countries. This is a significant characteristic of the American political system, which has been established by the recent wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq. No other country can compete with the US or even hope to imitate it. Moreover, many Europeans are of the opinion that imitating the US would be detrimental to Europe (Morgan, 2005). A number of realists critically evaluated the policies adopted by the Bush Administration in the Iraq war. Their evaluation chiefly dealt with the negative consequences of these policies on US security goals. The analysis and scrutiny of the Bush Administration’s policies with regard to the potential threat posed by the Saddam Hussein’s regime and the latter’s alleged procurement of Weapons of Mass Destruction, provided an opportunity to the realists to assess the possibility of enhancing US national security (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). The realist scholars have put forth five arguments against the Bush Administration’s decision of going to war with Iraq. They contend that military action can only be initiated when there is insecurity and that in this instance; the insecurity was fabricated, in order to conduct the war. First, the Bush Administration’s strategy involved containment and deterrence which worked well against the Saddam’s regime. However, it used pre-emptive measures against Iraq which proved to be effective. Some realists argue that such pre-emptive action may not always constitute a sure fire strategy (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). Second, if Saddam Hussein had possessed weapons of mass destruction, then the invasion would have provided Saddam Hussein with an opportunity to use the WMD against the US military or give those weapons to militant groups; which would have enabled them to use them, as a symbol of antagonism towards the US. The Bush Administration was singularly guilty of having disregarded this terrifying possibility, while deciding to wage war and to change the extant regime in Iraq (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). Third, Iraq is in a strategic geographical position in the region. Thus any war with Iraq would generate tension in the region, which could escalate uncontrollable regional conflicts among the nations of that area. This was an extremely disquieting development that the Bush administration overlooked. Fourth, the international community would label the US as a rogue superpower that employed its power to dominate the world. This could generate considerable antagonism, which could be harmful to US interests in the long run. In addition, terrorist attacks could be unleashed on the US as revenge (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). Fifth, there was no gainsaying the fact that the US would win the war against Iraq, due its greater capabilities. However, the subsequent rebuilding efforts could prove to be daunting and prohibitively expensive for the US. Furthermore, the US could find it to be very difficult to maintain the integrity of Iraq, which teemed with numerous factions and minority groups. For instance, the Kurds dominate the north, whereas the Shiite Muslims hold sway in the south. In addition, followers of Saddam Hussein, fundamentalist guerrilla groups and common criminals could pose a serious threat to American soldiers, who had stayed back to completed the rebuilding process. Furthermore, Iraq had ignored its infrastructural needs for the past two decades. These factors could prove to be overwhelming for the US (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). International relations comprises of structures that are far less in number, in comparison to the variables that are employed by classical realism. The latter theory is the consequence of the thinking that the acquisition of power is the chief trait of human nature. Moreover, classical realists contend that international politics is characterized by the nonexistence of control on the employment of aggression; which grossly restricts the cooperation between countries, in addition to enhancing all that is bad with mankind (Kaufman, 2007. Pp. 51 – 52 ). All the same, classical realists hold differing views on several issues. For example, there is considerable difference in what they believe about shared values, type of regimes and the relative significance of ideology. Furthermore, there is considerable distinction regarding the level of pessimism that they attribute to human nature. Some of the more optimistic classical realists believe that humanity is capable of mitigating if not totally getting rid of worldwide conflict, and they ascribe this to mankind’s ability to perform good deeds, on occasion. In fact, the dissatisfaction with which a St. Augustine or a Machiavelli viewed human nature is absent among realists of the US (Kaufman, 2007. Pp. 51 – 52 ). A few radical Muslims believe that a clash of civilizations is in the offing and that it is essential for them to unequivocally declare their religious fellowship. The number of such persons has shown an appreciable increase in the aftermath of the Iraq war. A major accusation of these radical Muslims is that the US suffers from a poverty of ethicality and that its arrogance derives from its unchallenged military might (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). A British report, July 2003, disclosed that some Muslims could have been rendered amenable to a greater degree to al Queda and its activities, after the war with Iraq. The realists have stressed that such concentration of ill will towards the US had the distinct possibility of endangering its interests, not only within the US but also outside it (Lott, 2004. P. 142 – 149). Leaders wield considerable power and have the desire to dominate others, in order to serve national interests; and this aspect is concentrated upon by realists. There exist a number of countries in the Middle East that are inimical towards the US and its interests. It would be very likely for realists to assert that the US invasion of Iraq was aimed at exercising control over such hostile nations. Furthermore, Saddam Hussein had exhibited a penchant to emerge as the leader of that area, to acquire Iranian territory, overwhelm Kuwait and obtain influence over Saudi Arabia that has huge oil deposits. The realists contended that it was the avowed objective of the US to depose Saddam Hussein (Mansbach & Rafferty, 2008. P.22). On the 1st of May 2003, President George Bush announced that the US had won the war against Iraq. He also declared that the combat had ended but the casualties did not end. The fierce fighting between the guerrillas and the American troops stationed in Iraq, continued unabated. In December 2003, Saddam Hussein was captured by US forces and this led to an escalation in the violence. The allegation that Saddam Hussein had produced and accumulated chemical, biological and nuclear weapons remained unproved, and no evidence was found that Iraq had procured weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons (Iraq War, 2004). The international community criticised the US for its exaggeration of the potential threat from Iraq, which had been the raison d'être for the invasion of Iraq. The US lost a large number of its soldiers and almost 138 US troops lost their life by May 1, 2003. On the first anniversary of this invasion, a total of 152 American deaths were reported. The US reviewed its Iraq policy; and the number of casualties compelled it to review its Iraqi policy. Consequently, it entered into an agreement with the Iraqi Government Council in July 2004 and agreed to transfer rule to the interim government (Iraq War, 2004). Prior to the Iraqi invasion, the US stated that Saddam Hussein’s regime had procured and developed weapons of mass destruction. It also declared that Iraq was hand in glove with the terrorist group al Qaeda, and was sponsoring cross-border terrorist activities. These were the principal reasons given by the US for invading Iraq. However, subsequent events served to establish that the US contention had been false and was merely a veil for the invasion. The United States, also declared that it was committed to establishing democracy in Iraq. However, this declaration was not convincing. The motive behind the US invasion of Iraq and its expenditure of vast amounts of money to rebuild Iraq are being questioned (Zunes, 2004). The United States is notorious for deposing sovereign governments, by employing covert military actions, direct attacks and proxy armies. However, the invasion of Iraq revealed a new dimension to the US use of the international community. The United States, ostensibly acted as per the norms of international law. In reality, it utilized its superpower status to manipulate international law to serve its ends. All the other governments had to accept American principles and perceptions. The US is the major provider of funds for international bodies, such as the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Its neo – liberal economic model, influences international bodies and dominates global economy (Zunes, 2004). Conclusion The US invasion and occupation of Iraq were planned to caution other Arab nations in the region, especially Iran. This was the short term benefit for the United States. The attempt to justify the invasion, by the Bush administration, by contending that Saddam Hussein had procured weapons of mass destruction, could not be established. Another justification for the invasion, namely that the US wanted to establish democracy in Iraq, also proved to be false. As such, the US established its own institutions in Iraq, which coerced the people of Iraq to comply with the requirements of the US. This proved to be the long term benefit to the US (The US Invasion of Iraq). A number of eminent realists, belonging to the United States of America, criticised the Bush administration’s actions in Iraq and declared that this escapade was detrimental to US interests. They further opined that a judicious combination of physical aggression and economic sanctions would have sufficed to cow down the Iraqis. As such, the US is keen to engender a new unilateralism that will establish and sustain its numero uno status in the comity of nations. The specious reasons being trotted out by the US, regarding the possession of WMD’s by Iraq and other such farfetched myths, are meant for diverting the attention of the world from this objective. Despite the lack of evidence regarding the presence of such weapons, Iraq was overrun by a vastly superior US, and the world could only sit back and mouth platitudes. Such is the power that the US wields and the Iraq invasion establishes the fact that US will take what it wants from others, if necessary, even by force. List of References Cole, J. (n.d.). "U.S.-Iraq War," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2008. Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_701610462_5/U_S_-Iraq_War.html Iraq War. (2004). Retrieved September 10, 2008, from In The Great American History Fact-Finder: http://www.credoreference.com/entry/6600787/ Kaufman, R. G. (2007. Pp. 51 – 52 ). In Defense of the Bush Doctrine. University Press of Kentucky. Lee, D. S. (2007. P.132). Power Shifts, Strategy and War: Declining States and International Conflict. Routledge. ISBN: 0415773385. Lott, A. D. (2004. P. 142 – 149). Creating Insecurity: Realism, Constructivism, and Us Security Policy. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., ISBN 0754638081, 9780754638087. Mansbach, R. W., & Rafferty, K. L. (2008. P.22). Introduction to Global Politics. Routledge. Morgan, G. (2005). realism and european political integration: the lessons of the united states. european political science , 4, 206 – 207. The US Invasion of Iraq. (n.d.). Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/iraqi-invasion.html Thomas Jr, J., Thomas, J., & Poppen, J. (2004. Pp.79 – 80). Executive Conspiracy? Authorhouse. ISBN: 141404514X. Zunes, S. (2004, October 20). The US Invasion of Iraq: The Military Side of Globalization? Retrieved September 10, 2008, from http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1020-28.htm Read More