Seniors, plz criticize. will it be attempted this way or other?


Evaluate the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. How far the American policymakers remained successful in achieving their goals?

Introduction:
After the gulf war of 1991, the UN had established a special commission called UNSCOM5 to supervise disposal of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. However, commission was denied access to warehouses. Finally, in 1998, they were forced by the regime to leave Iraq. Resultantly, President Bush delivered an ultimatum on March 17, demanding that Saddam Hussein leave Iraq within 48 hours which he denied. On March, 2003, the U.S. and its allies initiated the invasion of Iraq under operation Iraqi Freedom. On April 9,U.S. forces formally occupied Baghdad, and on December 13 the same year, Saddam Hussein was captured and persecuted in 2006.

CAUSES & PURPOSES OF US INVASION:

US WAR ON TERRORISM:
To eliminate al-qaeda. However, Iraq did not specifically harbour al-Qaeda, but it had provided training camps and other support to terrorist groups fighting the government of Turkey and Iran, as well as hard-line Palestinian groups.

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION:
In 1983, Iraq used chemical weapons in its war with Iran. US feared that if Iraq had WMD, they could easily be acquired by terrorists. These weapons will be destructive for the region and it s ally Israel too. When Saddam Hussain tried to maintain ambiguity about WMD, US decided to intervene.

To Preserve Uni-polarity:
Removing Saddam Hussein would be a demonstration of US military might against a visible enemy, a demonstration which elements within the Bush administration and the military establishment considered necessary to deter others and to dispel any appearance of weakness following 9/11. The Iraq Invasion, was meant to “maintain unipolarity, and avoid post-9/11 decline by demonstrating U.S. willingness to use force.

Oil Reserves:
The element of oil cannot be overlooked. Iraq has the world’s second largest reserves of oil. Many disagree that war was for oil, but it is oil which makes Iraq influential power in the region. Removing saddam Hussain will serve US interests.

DEMOCRACY IN THE REGION:
Bring democracy to a country in the centre of a region almost completely devoid of it. In his State of the Union, President Bush made it clear that he intended to bring democracy to the Middle East. Bush wanted to set Iraq an example for other states in the region that democracy can bring prosperity. This will end anti-American sentiment in the region.

HOW FAR POLICY MAKERS SUCCEED:

US policymakers didn’t win in any meaningful sense of the success. They failed to achieve what they wanted.

Destruction of WMD:
The alleged purpose of the war was eliminating Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, but it turns out he didn’t have any.

Establishment of Pro-American Democracy:
Before the war, advocates argued that democracy would be easy to install in Iraq. Then the rationale shifted to creating a pro-American democracy, but Iraq today is at best a quasi-democracy and far from pro-American.

COST OF WAR:
The costs of the war (easily exceeding $1 trillion dollars) are much larger than U.S. leaders anticipated or promised.

Eliminate Terrorism:
Solve the terrorism problem but it wasn’t but added. Rise of ISIS is self explanatory. Al Qaeda also tried to exploit the post-invasion power-vacuum to go after U.S. forces and advance its own agenda.

Peace and Prosperity in the country & region:
Instead it promoted insurgency. Sunnis in Iraq took up arms to resist the loss of power, wealth, and status that the collapse of the Ba’thist regime entailed. Syria and Iran took various measures to strengthen anti-U.S. forces inside Iraq, in order to bog it down. The rise of militancy spread to its neighbouring country like Syria and yemen.

A part from this, the destruction of Iraq improved Iran’s position in the Persian Gulf — which is hardly something the United States intended The war was also a giant distraction, which diverted the Bush administration from other priorities (e.g., Afghanistan) and made the United States much less popular around the world.

Legality of war:
The legality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq has been widely debated since the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Poland and a coalition of other countries launched the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annanstated in September 2004 that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal. Since the action of USA and UK undermined the authority of UN.

Critical analysis:
The main motive behind Iraq invasion was to eliminate WMD. However, US could not find them till today. The whole war ended in complete failure. Moreover, Sadam Hussain was a rational actor. If it was made clear that Saddam had no chemical or biological weapons, then he would lose one of his key instruments of inflicting fear both among his own population and Iraq’s neighbours. This could diminish Iraq’s position as a major force in the region. Saddam’s rational choice would then be to create uncertainty or ambiguity as to whether or not he actually had these weapons. Without proof of Iraq having WMD, it seemed unlikely that the West would intervene, and without proof of Iraq not having WMD, it would keep insurgents and Iraq’s neighbours at bay. However, US along with UK intervened without any evidence of WMD.

Conclusion: