Humanitarian Intervention in Iraq Essay

In March of 2003 the United States of America invaded the Middle Eastern nation of Iraq. Under many pretenses, the stage was being set for this invasion, one reason calling for the invasion was that Bush administration and its officials assured the world that the Hussein regime was producing weapons of mass destruction or WMD’s, which would pose a huge security threat to all the nations around the world. Another being the fact that Hussein supported the group responsible for the attacks on our country on September 11th 2001, which angered plenty of Americans and seemingly justified violence to be used. And also the fact that Hussein needed to be removed from power as he was a brutal dictator who was committing egregious acts of violence against his own people. Therefore a humanitarian intervention would be called for using militaristic means. The administration under President Bush pushed the idea on the American people and the world that Iraq would be a better place without H ussein in control, also making the world a safer place. This war has cost the lives of approximately 600,000 Iraqis and 3,163 American soldiers, not to mention other soldiers from other nations involved in the conflict. The actions leading up to the subsequent invasion and occupation affected Iraq negatively and caused consequences that harmed all of Iraqi society, mainly innocent people. The way the world dealt with Saddam Hussein wasn’t proper nor in the best interests going forward for the Iraqi people and the citizens of the world based on many factors. Years before boots were even on the ground in Iraq, the world had taken extreme steps to curb Iraqi aggression, most notably beginning in 1990 when Iraq invaded its neighbor Kuwait in August. There were many reasons why Iraq may have invaded Kuwait. Some say that it was because Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil and even the fact that Iraq owed Kuwait large sums of money after the Iran-Iraq war. But one of the very first steps that were taken was that the United Nations (UN) became heavily involved. The UN includes the UN Security Council (UNSC) which is the group that has control over UN military force and is in charge of implementing resoluti ons against regimes that may be breaking international law. The first resolution put in place against Iraq was UNSC 678, which was implemented just a few days after the Iraqi Revolutionary Guard invaded the country. UNSC 678 â€Å"authorized force against Iraq, to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area.† This action was ordered through all necessary means including use of the military. This was known as the Gulf War, but UNSC 678 only applied to the actions taken in 1990 through 1993 and does not include the intervention in 2003 by American and coalition forces. Next was UNSC resolution 1154, passed in 1998 and which mandated that Iraq was not allowed to be in possession or manufacture chemical, biological, or nuclear weaponry. This resolution also stated that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and its inspectors were required to inspect Iraq’s suspected nuclear and weapons manufacturing facilities. Iraq did not completely comply with the resolution because they did not allow unrestricted access with what the IAEA inspectors wanted to see. This was seen as a shady move to much of the world and as if the Hussein regime had something to hide. A final warning to Iraq was issued in 2002 in UNSC resolution 1441, which was the last warning to the Hussein regime to comply with the demands of the previous UNSC resolutions and limit their weapons capabilities. In Alex Conte’s book, Operation Iraqi Freedom he states that, â€Å"Resolutions 678, 687, 1441, and 1154 do not legitimize use of force in Iraq† (Conte 139-162). There are only a select few instances in which the UNSC authorizes the use of force, one being if the expression â€Å"all necessary means and measures† is used in the resolution or if a member state of the UN is granted a mandate for action in another state and it is approved by the UNSC. Wording for many of these resolutions was very controversial be tween representatives of various nation states on the UNSC, regarding what powers one could legally take. But overall none of these UNSC resolutions approved of any military action to be taken in Iraq humanitarian or not in 2003; so in other words, all of the military actions that were taken were not legal in any form and against international law. The economic sanctions against Iraq also heavily affected the country before it was invaded by the coalition forces in 2003. â€Å"Iraq’s devastation is not primarily the result of American bombing†¦but the economic crisis that befell the country before the first shot was fired† (Rieff 185). The sanctions placed on Iraq were intended to hurt the Hussein regime, but in fact they just hurt the people under Hussein’s rule and put the entire Iraqi economy into terrible condition. The sanctions were a response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and reportedly used as a deterrent to Hussein’s aggression in the area, but the people hurt most by the sanctions were innocent Iraqis. â€Å"From 1991 until 2003 t he effects of government policy and the sanctions led to hyperinflation, widespread poverty, and malnutrition† (Dodge 706). This goes to show the negative effects that the sanctions had on the citizens of Iraq. Also mentioned in Rieff’s book, Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention: At the Point of a Gun, is the fact that daily life was getting harder for Iraqis and their ability to receive the same goods as they had before the sanctions diminished drastically; â€Å"Before the sanctions Iraq imported 70% of its food, medicine, and chemicals, UNSC resolution 661 stopped all of that† (Rieff 187). These facts made the Iraqi citizens hate the crippling sanctions that were being placed on them because of the aggression of just their dictatorial leader. Many scholars believe that the sanctions made life already under a brutal dictator even more constrained and restrictive. Iraq before the sanctions was a very strong welfare state just like many of the oil rich nations of the Middle East which gave pensions to their citizens based on oil income, about â€Å"40% of Iraqi households were dependent on government payment† (Dodge 709). But because of the sanctions that same forty percent had to find other ways to receive income in a worsening economy. Many citizens such as Khaled Afra, a student opposed the sanctions just as they opposed the rule of Hussein, â€Å"Saddam was a criminal, the biggest. But the sanctions were also criminal†¦ You see the sanctions really crushed our dreams – not my personal dreams only, but those of my Iraqi people, all of us† (Rieff 193). Hussein did use the sanctions to his advantage though; he used them as premise to form Iraqi public opinion against the sanctions, the various governments of the West, and the United Nations. Huge propaganda campaigns began in the country and in a way were very successful, Hussein, for example, would convince his people that in fact he wasn’t evil and it was the nations of the West that were evil as they placed the sanctions on Iraq to try and starve innocent Iraqis. Hussein even agreed to the Food for Oil program, which help ed relieve some of the pressure and troubles faced by civilians as a result of the sanctions. The program allowed Iraq to sell its oil not for money but for food, medicine, and other supplies that were highly needed in Iraq at the time. Iraqi citizens loved this and praised Hussein for going through and agreeing with the program. A highly questioned component of the sanctions placed on the regime is why did they last so long? As mentioned earlier, the sanctions began right after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 but yet they didn’t end until 2003 when the American invasion of Iraq began. Most in the international community believed that the sanctions should’ve ceased to exist after the Gulf War was over or maybe just for a few more years after Iraqi forces were pushed out of Kuwait, but not for a full thirteen years. â€Å"Even many Arab nations who supported the sanctions at first believed that they should have been removed after Iraq left Kuwait† (Rieff 190). Most nations, even those who were against the Hussein regime saw the sanctions being in place after Iraq was ejected from Kuwait as unnecessary, cruel, and throwing salt on the wounds of a nation. The sanctions just made life worse for the regular citizens of Iraq, but the worst was yet to come. One good thing that may have come out of the sanctions is the fact that they did prevent the Hussein regime from obtaining or creating any weapons of mass destruction because the country just could not afford the types of technology needed to do so. Another factor that made conditions even worse for Iraq was the failed planning and research that should’ve been completed before the invasion of the country. â€Å"Fear that Iraq was developing a weapon of mass destruction became sufficiently unbearable to Bush and Congress that they launched and supported a preemptive war based on a poorly defined threat† (Sheenan 6). For one many were forced to believe that Hussein was in possession of WMDs which he wasn’t, therefore that threat did not even exist at all and should be exempt from reasons to invade and occupy the country. Planners of the invasion came up with a plan to oust Hussein from power using what they referred to as the decapitation thesis. The decapitation thesis is just as literal as it sounds, remove the head of the government, referring to Hussein and other high ranking Ba’ath party officials, and continue to use the body, which would be the institutions still under state control, as the head is replaced with new leadership. But the plan did not work as it was supposed to; after Hussein was ousted the country just fell into a power vacuum. Who would the people turn to for leadership? Because Iraq no longer had very strong state institutions, they were collapsed and were no longer working since the country was invaded. â€Å"In the space of two years, because of invasion a nd then state collapse, Iraq went from Rogue, the first category of problematic state, to the second, collapsed. Although military intervention into Rogue states has become increasingly common since the Cold War, it has to date been largely unsuccessful† (Dodge 706). This goes to show that largely — based on the past and places in similar situations — that Iraq was destined to fail. And besides the fact that the planners didn’t fully investigate the situation it seemed that they have even had other objectives besides the ones being expressed to the public. For example, â€Å"In April 2006, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld visited Baghdad to intervene in internal discussions about the government and to seek assurances that any future government would allow the United States to preserve its military bases in Iraq† (Arnove 116). Why would the U.S. need to establish bases in Iraq if the primary goal was humanitarian and to free the repressed people under the Hussein regime? Humanitarian intervention was also a huge factor in why the invasion and subsequent occupation was being justified in Iraq. Humanitarian interventions are usually mandated and put in place at the request of the legitimate government that needs the intervention. In this case the government of Iraq would have needed to explicitly ask outside powers to intervene, in which they did not. â€Å"The Security Council did not approve the invasion and the Iraqi government; its existence on the line, violently opposed it† (Roth 1). The Hussein regime opposed such an intervention obviously because it would signal an end to their rule. Even if it was to be a humanitarian intervention by the rules of international law the leaders accused of the alleged crimes against humanity should be brought on trial by the International Criminal Court (ICC). This was not the case for Iraq; none of the high ranking Ba’ath party officials including Hussein were even tried.