The Bush Administration's Relation With Iraq Prior to Iraq's Invasion of Kuwait
Prior to the August 2, 1990 invasion of Kuwait on the part of Iraq, the
United States had questionable relations with Iraq dictator, Saddam Hussein, to
say the least. In retrospect, which is inherently advantageous as a 20/20
perspective, questions remain unanswered as to whether or not the United States
was too appeasing to Saddam Hussein in the years, months, and days leading up to
that early August morning. There remains to this day lingering questions as to
the role that the US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, played in conveying the
Administration's message to the Iraqi leader. In addition, questions
surrounding the Administrators official policy, the calculations (or
miscalculations) on the part of the State Department and other agencies within
the US government, the Administrations covert plan to aid an Italian bank in
illegal loans to benefit Saddam's military and the advice that the US received
from other Arab nations with respect to what US relations should be with Iraq in
terms of any impending border dispute, constitute a limited context of the
issues that faced the Administration as it tried to deal with the leader of the
largest economy of the Persian Gulf region.
The Bush Administration's relations with Iraq prior to its invasion of
Kuwait were clouded in a context of misperception by both states and further
complicated by a lack of credibility on the part of key actors of both sides as
well. This tragic sequence of events that led to the invasion of Kuwait cannot
solely be attributed to personality traits or even actions by key individuals
within the Administration. In retrospect, it is much more complex than that.
However, the actions and public and private statements on the part of key
personnel on both sides most likely contributed to the eventual invasion of
Kuwait by Iraq in 1990.
Since, a brief, yet modest account of the history of the events leading
up to the invasion and the invasion in itself along with the regional and global
actors has been offered in section A, section B will be an analysis of the role
of misperception and questions of credibility with respect to key actors on both
sides of the issue, from State Department officials to Saddam Hussein himself.
While touching on the importance and significance of o...
... middle of paper ...
..., 3/20/91
6 Glaspie, April, Opening Remarks, Hearing by the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, 3/20/91
7 Iraqi Government, Excerpts from Iraqi Document on Meeting with US Envoy, "The
New York Times, 9/23/90, p.19
8 Sciolino, Elaine, "US Gave Iraq Little Reason Not to Mount Kuwait Assault,"
The New York Times, 9/23/90, p.A1
9 Sciolino, Elaine, "US Gave Iraq Little Reason Not to Mount Kuwait Assault,"
The New York Times, 9/23/90, p.A1
10 Sciolino, Elaine, "US Gave Iraq Little Reason Not to Mount Kuwait Assault,"
The New York Times, 9/23/90, p.A1
11 Sciolino, Elaine, "US Gave Iraq Little Reason Not to Mount Kuwait Assault,"
The New York Times, 9/23/90, p.A18
12 Sciolino, Elaine, "US Gave Iraq Little Reason Not to Mount Kuwait Assault,"
The New York Times, 9/23/90, p.A18
14 Friedman, Thomas, "US Explains View of Envoy to Iraq," The New York Times,
3/22/31, p.A9, col. 1
15 Sciolino, Elaine, "Envoy's Testimony on Iraq is Assailed," The New York Times,
7/13/91, p.A1, col.1
16 Sciolino, Elaine, "Envoy's Testimony on Iraq is Assailed," The New York Times,
7/13/91, p.A4, col.1
17 McAllister, J.F.O., "The Lessons of Iraq," Time, 11/2/92, pp.57-59
The Persian Gulf War started on 17 January 1991 in response to Iraq’s invasion and annexation
Only two weeks later Hussein held a speech, where he accused the neighbor, Kuwait, for draining oil from the Ar-Rumaila oil fields, this was an oil field located along the border, and was a part of both countries. He accused Saudi Arabia and Kuwait for conspiring to keep the prices of oil low to pamper the western oil-buying nations. In addition to Hussein’s speech, the Iraqi troops had already started to gather along the border of Kuwait, ready to invade. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt was alarmed by this, and started negotiations between the two parts to try to avoid nasty things to happen, and to keep the US from getting involved, but after only two hours, he had to give up, and on August 2 1990, he ordered the invas...
In 1991, Saddam Hussein decided to declare massive aggression on the countries bordering Iraq. The most affected country was Kuwait. Due to the nature of their ties with the United States, Iraq had a well organized and equipped army that was capable of causing massive instability in Kuwait. The United States could not let this happen because of the importance of Kuwait to the US. Kuwait and the US were heavily involved in the oil business with Kuwait being one of the biggest oil suppliers in the world to the US. The aggression by Saddam Hussein to Kuwait was also a major threat to other Arab nations in the region that had formed trade ties with the US. The involvement of the US in this aggression became the first major predicament that President Bush faced regarding foreign policies and relations. The US could not allow Saddam to take over the Arab nations as that would pose a major threat to the supply of oil to the US. In addition, Iraq would have control over 20% of the world’s major oil supplies in the world. As a result President Bush responded to the Iraq despot’s power play with Kuwait to mobilize a global coalition with Arab nations in “Operation Desert Storm” that repelled Saddam Hussein’s aggression in 1991 (Crab and Mulcahy 255).
The key to solving this complex problem was former President, Jimmy Carter. All through the crisis, Jimmy Carter stayed in direct contact with General Cedras, who he had come to know well while acting as an independent election- observer during the Haitian elections in 1993. Carter knew the situation on the ground and offered to act as a go-between. However, White House officials declined his offer initially. This was partly because they were upset that Carter had publicly disagreed with some of the current administration's policies as regards North Korea.
In September 1980, a very destructive war with Iran was started by Saddam Hussein. This was a result of an invasion in Iran. This invasion spurred an eight year war. Saddam used c...
Then on the 22nd of August, Iraqi soldiers pervaded Kuwait taking and occupying everything of Kuwait government and property. Kuwait then sent out a cry for help to the big almighty country of the United States of America. Sheikh Jaber Al Sabah the current emir of Kuwait immediately met with the United State’s Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney at the time to ask for some sort of assistance to help get back Kuwait and drive the Iraqi forces back to Iraq. The United States then agreed with the Sabah and then started making plans of how they would take back Kuwait. The U.S gave specific orders to Saddam Hussein the leader of Iraq to withdraw his troop by the 15th of January of the year of 1991. If Hussein failed to do so the U.S would basically help Saddam and his military get out of Kuwait.
The Gulf war was a conflict that took place from 2 August 1990 to 28 February 1991. The reason for the United States involvement in this conflict was to liberate Kuwait from the invasion of Iraq. (Henry) SHORAD had a large role to play in this event through the protection against Iraq’s air breathing and munitions threats.
When Iraq invaded and occupied the country of Kuwait in August 1990, the Bush administration was faced with several dilemmas. From a foreign policy point of view, this action could greatly destabilize the balance of power in a part of the world that was vital to U.S. interests. The United States was dependant on a continuous flow of oil to drive its economic machine, which Kuwait supplied greatly. In addition, this move would put more power into the hands of a government that was not only unfriendly to the U.S., but a sworn enemy of the state of Israel, a strong U.S. ally. In addition to, the fall of communism had created what George Bush had described as, "A new world order," and would become the first major test of how the U.S. would handle its role as the sole remaining super power in this "new world order." There were many challenges facing the Bush administration as to the manner in which they would handle this first major international crisis. The Bush administration had to develop a consensus of the major remaining powers, and appear not acting alone in its response to President Saddam Hussein's actions of invading Kuwait. They also yearned to keep Israel from being involved so as not to alienate the remaining Middle Eastern nations. Lastly, they faced a domestic dilemma, in that much of the American public had significant reservations about involving U.S. troops involved in a foreign conflict. There remained a bad taste of Vietnam among the American public, and there were very mixed responses to American involvement in Somalia, Nicaragua, and Grenada. For the Bush administration, Hussein was not a merchant who could be bargained with, but rather an outlaw who would have to be defeated by force. The Bush administration was faced with a task of developing (more or less) overwhelming support from the U.S. people to take any action in Kuwait, which was accomplished by a dramatic public relations move to demonize Saddam Hussein in the eyes of the American people.
On March 18, 2003 the United States invaded Iraq. (The Washington Post) The War with Iraq is a very divisive issue around the world. Turn on any news show and you will see a daily debate on the pros and cons of going to war. Because of the situations that have occurred between the United States and Iraq, very different views and perceptions have developed. Much debate on the justification of the United States for being in Iraq, let alone overthrowing its “government”, has been presented from both sides – the Hawks and the Doves.
The authors clearly differed in their analysis of the 2003 Iraq War. Chapter 15, page 283, details the UN inspection of Iraqi sites by the UNMOVIC program. The author details the lack of Iraqi cooperation in the late 1990s, and then skips to asking why Saddam did not give in at the last minute and allow full inspections. Chapter 19, page 359,
On March 20, 2003, the combined military forces of the United States and Britain crossed the southern border of Iraq and Kuwait with the intent of capitulating the government of Saddam Hussein. Over the course of 21 days, the joint task force moved quickly and decisively to seize major objective cities along the road to Baghdad using aviation, armor, artillery, and infantry. Following the overwhelming success of the primary combat operations of the invasion, stability and support systems proved insufficient as sectarian violence and other criminal activity among the local population of Iraq increased.
For the past several months the United Nations’ Security Council has debated on whether or not to accept the U.S. proposal to force Iraq to comply the new and former resolutions. The new resolution calls for complete disarmament of Iraq and the re-entrance of weapons inspectors into Iraq. If Iraq fails to comply, then military force would be taken in order to disarm Iraq. This proposal met opposition from council members Russia, China, and France. They thought that the U.S. proposal was too aggressive and that the U.S. should not act alone without U.N. approval. For weeks they refused to believe that the only way to make Iraq disarm is through the threat of force and the fear of being wiped out.
...q. Hussein spent months in hiding, however he was later found. He was charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. He was then sent back to Iraq to face his death sentence: he was hung just north of Baghdad, at the Kadhimiya military base (EuroNews). It is clear that Hussein was willing to sacrifice the well being of his people and break alliances with strong allies as well as refuse demands from the United Nations Security Council to maintain control. Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical rule oppressed ethnic and religious groups in the Middle East, enabled him to make alliances that ensured that his position in authority continued, and led him to believe that he could refuse to comply with international laws. All of this, prompted the foreign involvement against Iraq and ultimately contributed to the problematic situation occurring in the country today.
Pre-invasion Iraq reflected the views and policies of its leader, Saddam Hussein, who made his first political appearance as a supporter of the Ba’ath Party. He was jailed in 1967 for this, and after his escape quickly rose to power within the faction. (Saddam Hussein Biography, 2008) Saddam became known for his political talent and progressiveness, and soon became a popular politician. After working on extensive unification and expansion efforts for the Ba’athists, the man rose to vice chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council. Faced with a tremendous amount of religious, racial, social and economic divisions, Saddam launched a campaign of total control to bring about stability.
The Iraq War was a protracted armed conflict that began with the 2003 invasion of Iraq by a US-led coalition. The US wanted to destroy Saddam Hussein’s regime and bring democracy. To addition to that, US and its allies believed that Iraq had secret stocks of chemical and nuclear weapons, hence Iraq was a threat to the world (Axford 2010). In March 2003, US air bombed Baghdad and Saddam escaped Iraq. The invasion disarmed the government of Saddam Hussein. President Bush in March 2003 gave a premature speech, that tyrant of Iraq has fallen and US has freed its people. President Bush flew into Iraq to show the world that the war is over, even though nothing was accomplished (Kirk et al. 2014). Iraq was facing 13 years of scantions, therefore regime diverted its resources to flexible networks of patronage that kept it in power (Dodge 2007, 88). Iraq faced widespread of lawlessness and after the violent regime changed US could not control the situation. Iraqi civilians were looting, attacking ministries building and this resulted into a series of event (Kirk et al. 2014) . From a military perspective the regime was taken down, but they made no commitment to rebuild or secure the country.