Creating Tolerance in the Community© 2010. All Rights Reserved 2010.

 

Iraq: Rebuilding for a Democratic State

 

 

 

Is Iraq a success or failure? This cannot be answered right now, as Iraq is still going through a reconstruction and rebuilding of Iraqi institutions that form the basis of governance, law and order, and security that a country needs to become a stable state.

 

Saddam Hussein one of the world’s worst dictatorial leader of the Middle East, held on to his powerful position as Iraq's President through a harsh and brutal regime.

 

The symptoms of Saddam Hussein’s vision of Iraq and the Middle East is because of the First World War (1914-1918), the Second World War (1939-1945), and more recently the Cold War (1950‘s - 1990‘s). Each of these periods the Middle East has been mapped-out and remapped, and then during the Cold War the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and Western European countries, and Russia used the Middle East as a battleground. Eastern and Western sides funding and supporting Iraq through the decades trying to be dominate in the Middle Eastern region.

 

Saddam Hussein’s rise to power was a bloody and turbulent campaign, which ended-up with many political opponents being murdered. Saddam Hussein and the political party he was a member of the Baath Party, became President of Iraq from the 1979 through to the invasion by Coalition Forces headed by the United States of America and the United Kingdom on the 20th March 2003, which was to be one of the most contentious global political issues of recent times.

 

The reason Saddam Hussein’s regime remained in power for so long was because of his unforgiving mercy on his opponents and enemies. The last thing Saddam Hussein would have wanted was an effective opposition. Saddam Hussein knew deep down that the bloody campaign he took to gain power in Iraq, split too much blood, and one day his blood would be split. The only answer to the eventual fate of Saddam Hussein and his regime was whether he was going to be overthrown internally or externally.  

 

Exiled Iraqis in both the United States of America, and the United Kingdom lobbied both governments to remove Saddam Hussein. The only problem is that removing State Leaders is illegal under International Law, which would protect Saddam Hussein and enable him to be brazen and goad his enemies. Saddam Hussein knew that if external forces couldn’t remove him and his decades of removing internal opponents, and enemies, it gave him the sense that he wasn’t only powerful but invincible.  

 

This sense of being invincible was boosted by Saddam Hussein’s error of invading Kuwait in August 1990. Again Saddam Hussein used the colonial past to justify an invasion of Kuwait and (also slant drilling oil in Iraqi territory), by stating that Kuwait was originally part of Iraq (and stealing oil from Iraq), but The Kingdom of Iraq had been created and given independence by the British in 1935. This gave the opportunity of not only defeating and removing Iraqi armed forces from Kuwait but to remove and defeat Saddam Hussein and his regime. There was support in the Middle East by countries such as Saudi Arabia to remove Iraqi armed forces from Kuwait and march onto Baghdad. For whatever reason the Coalition Alliance (led by America), didn’t go to Baghdad to overthrow Saddam Hussein, and this has cost the West and the Middle East by not removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. Instead the then American President Mr George Bush Snr, encouraged an uprising by oppressed Iraqis in Iraq. The idea was that if Iraqis softened-up the Iraqi armed forces within Iraq, then  the Coalition Alliance would invade Iraq in support of the uprising, and liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein.

 

Once the First Gulf War was over in 1991 and the uprising by oppressed Iraqis was defeated once again Saddam Hussein and his regime was very good at removing opponents and enemies and their families and associates within Iraq by systemically rounding-up them up and brutally executing them.

 

The Coalition Alliance knew that leaving Saddam Hussein in power wasn’t the best thing but they decided to leave him in power in Iraq but to contain him by imposing United Nations sanctions and no-fly zones in the north and south of Iraq, to help protect the Kurdish community, who had suffered a chemical weapons attack in Halabja on the 16th and 17th March 1988,  in the north of Iraq and other communities that was frightened of Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi armed forces.

 

The United Nations had an oil for medical and food supplies programme so that the Iraqi people wouldn’t be starved to death, and had medical supplies to protect the Iraqi people from diseases. But Iraqi oil found it’s way on the black-market, the revenue generated went into the Iraqi government and Saddam Hussein’s bank account. The Iraqi population ended-up being starved by food and medical supplies.

 

As the years went on Iraq didn’t prosper. The containment of United Nations sanctions and no-fly zones weren’t helping the Iraqi population. Another controversial issue, which entered into the troubled political arena was the manufacturing of chemical and biological weapons. Iraq had a programme to develop chemical and biological weapons, which were during the Iraq-Iran war and used against the Kurds in the of Iraq in Halabja in the 1980’s. Western countries and Russia knew Saddam Hussein was developing chemical and biological weapons because of Western and Russian help. Iraqi students taught in London and other countries in chemical and biology studies worried the West in particular. So the United Nations weapons inspectors entered in Iraq to investigate chemical and biological weapons development and manufacture. Eventually the United Nations weapons inspectors left Iraq due to the fact they were being impeded in visiting certain sites where there was suspicion of chemical and biological weapons factories.        

 

From the cat and mouse politics of the 1990’s concerning Iraq and the Western world, through to the 11th September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York, America, this sealed the fate of Iraq and Saddam Hussein. The destructive nature of Saddam Hussein and the oppressive society he helped to create in Iraq eventually collapsed on Saddam Hussein’s head when the worst terrorist attack ever mounted against the United States of America, and worst of all on American soil, killing not just Americans but civilians from every country around the world in the World Trade Center, in New York City.

 

While Saddam Hussein and many others revelled in this barbaric and senseless crime against other human beings, the worlds Super Power wasn’t going to lie down and let this criminal act go unpunished. Saddam Hussein made a mistake by sticking his head-out and goading the United States of America, over their tragedy. His outspoken criticism of America made him a target for American aggression.  

 

The only problem for the American government was what could they use to overthrow Saddam Hussein from his Presidency. While there wasn’t evidence of Saddam Hussien funding anti-west terrorists or paramilitary organisations more notably, al Qaeda. Though Saddam Hussein did make it public of helping to fund suicide bombers and their families once the suicide bomber died in the Palestinian Territories, which rang alarm bells in the American government but their still wasn’t any evidence of collusion between Saddam Hussein, and anti-west terrorist or paramilitary organisations, such as al Qaeda. Some commentators have made an interesting conclusion that Saddam Hussein wasn’t a supporter for terrorist or paramilitary organisations like al Qaeda, because he was frightened that these organisations could become powerful and overthrow him.    

 

If America with the help of the United Kingdom didn’t invade Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein and his government from power then one of the alternative theories in hindsight would be once Saddam Hussein died naturally, then his sons would have taken over or someone connected to the Hussein dynasty in Iraq.

 

Would we have seen an opportunity for a civil war? Maybe it would have happened or maybe not. But at some stage Iraq would have had trouble. As the years rolled-on more Iraqis would have been killed by the Iraqi armed forces, Iraqi police, Iraqi intelligence service, and any other Iraqi governmental agencies that traded in spilling blood.. What would have been a fact as we can see in Iraq now is the revenge killing and assassination of Iraqis by Iraqis. Not only is there Shia and Sunni sectarian violence, but not surprisingly violence between different terrorist, paramilitary, or military insurgent organisations and other groups operating in Iraq causing chaos, death, and destruction.

 

The American and British armed forces, as well as the other armed forces from an array of different allied countries that form the Coalition Alliance, are facing attacks from all sides of Iraqi society. What is happening in Iraq now is something no military or sociologist strategist would have ever envisaged. You’ve got the Sunni’s, which Saddam Hussein belonged to waging a terrorist and military campaign because of the invasion by America and Britain. There is Sunni and Shia sectarian violence because of oppression under Saddam Hussein. Foreign insurgents and foreign terrorist and paramilitary organisations, such as al Qaeda wanting to maximise bloodshed on their worst enemy America. Having bordering countries such as Iran and Syria funding and supporting paramilitary organisations as a last chance to inflict destruction on American armed forces before they leave. It’s going to take a lot of diplomacy to heal internal and external political arguments in Iraq and the Middle Eastern region.  

 

Saddam Hussein created the society that we are witnessing in Iraq today. Many Iraqis were affected by the brutality of their President, who not only allowed his opponents and enemies to face their own execution, but included family members and associates. So when Saddam Hussein was removed by the United States of America and the United Kingdom in 2003, the fuse finally burnt-out and it was time for revenge. Though revenge doesn’t do anything but cause more problems, whether now or in the future. Ordinary Iraqis are killing those that either killed, or got their loved-ones and friends murdered by the Iraqi armed forces, Iraqi police, and Iraqi intelligence services, because there only crime was to speak-out and voice objections to Saddam Hussein and his government. From the outside looking in, Iraq is in chaos and carnage. But their is only carnage because Saddam Hussein rose to power by murdering and creating carnage, and so when he fell, rightly or wrongly, that is what he would leave. The cause and effect theory has worked and is plain to see, for all to see, that when chaos and carnage is created first, it would be the last to leave.  

 

There are a few fundamental lessons the Western world in particular can learn from the situation of Iraq. Choose your allies carefully with a long-term view of stability, freedom, prosperity and peace for all. Unfortunately Iran became an enemy of the United States of America, when the exiled Alloytah Khomeni returned to Iran in 1979 and become leader of Iran, and declaring an Islamic revolution. What didn’t help relations between America and Iran was when the American Embassy was stormed in Tehran by the Iranians, and American embassy staff were held hostage until the next Presidential elections, which saw Jimmy Carter defeated. So American foreign policy was to support the other side, which happened to be Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Different commentators would argue that funding and supporting Iraq was needed because of Iran’s Islamic revolution travelling across the Middle East. This wouldn’t have travelled around respective Middle Eastern governments or further afield to other Islamic countries.

 

Western powers including the United States of America, funded and supported Saddam Hussein, to help to defeat their new enemy in the region, Iran. Another argument that has cropped-up is the factor that if American, British, French or German governments didn’t fund and support Iraq, then Communist Russia, China or other communist or non-democratic countries, would have funded or supported Iraq. The answer is that all of these countries funded and supported Iraq, probably at the bemusement or amusement of Saddam Hussein, who would have enjoyed pitting different countries against each other. Unfortunately Saddam Hussein’s loyalty was only to himself and keeping himself in the Presidential seat of power. This foreign policy was short-term and was destined to fail because of the instability of Saddam Hussein and his government, which ended-up butchering his own people. Because the United States of America and other Western powers, funded and supported Saddam Hussein, they were not so forthcoming in criticising and condemning Saddam Hussein, when he started to use chemical and biological weapons against the Iranian armed forces, and Iraqi Kurds.

   

It doesn't matter how you look at Iraq and the region. It has turned into a very big mess because of funding and supporting a man, and his regime, and made him and his regime powerful for a few decades, until he became the problem. And the sad part is the many lives whether Iraqi, American, British, and all the other nationalities that have died in this conflict, have died because of foreign governmental policy that was only looking at the short-term not the long-term.

 

The United States of America needs to settle and heal differences between Iran, Syria, and other countries that are not helping the situation in Iraq. With the Iranians and Syrians nervous that they are the next countries on America’s radar for invasion, to neutralise extreme elements in Iranian and Syrian governments. So if Iran and Syria support and fund paramilitary organisations in Iraq, it will keep the Americans and the Coalition Alliance bogged-down in Iraq, and unable to invade Iran and Syria. Also it is an indication that if Iran and Syria are invaded then what is happening in Iraq now would happen in Iran and Syria. So it is a vicious circle that needs diplomatic solutions and heal deep political disagreement's. Iranian, Syrian, and Western countries citizens do not want more war.

  

Things can slip into the most terrible of conditions, and that’s when Iraqis say enough is enough and peace becomes the goal every Iraqi wants. Paramilitary and terrorist organisations will eventually lose the tolerance of the Iraqi people, because of the destruction that is affecting every Iraqi civilian. The region will improve eventually because the majority of Iraqis are good. It's weeding-out the people that want to kill, maim and destroy Iraq. The Iraqi civilian population will do this hopefully supported by a new government that will not turn-out like the old one.

 

It has taken all of this to really see the full picture of how this particular region has been managed, within it's boundary and further a field, the only answer is can  this happen again?  

 

To respond to this campaign please email us at Creating Tolerance in the Community