George Bush

Under President Bush’s administration, the United States (US) decision and vote on Iraq War back in 2003 was one of the most controversial decisions made in the US. This is due to how significant the consequences of this decision are to the country and regionally.  The War’s intelligence support was flawed and unreliable, resulting in miscalculations in US foreign policy.

Despite having abundant resources, why did the intelligence agencies in the United States fail to comprehend the situation? The United States government had intercepted parts of Iraqi communications where senior Iraqis ordered the purification of a site before the arrival of U.N. inspectors, which revealed the cause of some tactical misunderstandings in Washington. During a significant presentation to the United Nations in February 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell used these intercepts as proof that the Iraqis were concealing their current weapons programs. However, after analysing the complete context given by Iraqi records, it was apparent that the government was concerned about a false positive resulting from the leftovers of an outdated program.

Still, the US-led coalition launched an invasion of Iraq, closely supported by the UK, with premises: that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein owned weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and had toes with terrorist groups, which later found little evidence. David Kay, head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), later said ‘Let me begin by saying we were almost all wrong, and I certainly include myself here”.  They also claimed to create a ‘friendly and democratic’ Iraq as an example for the region, and some also added additional needs for oil supply from the area.

They held democratic elections, but until now, Iraq has been one of the most corrupt countries in the world. The condition reflects how crucial the decision-making process is as the result of a decision can make a country like Iraq deal with a more complex situation.

The US’ decision and change in public perception

So, what was behind the US decision to use military capability in Iraq? We know that the decision to go to War is complex, and it needs a strategic calculation as it involves military strategies, congress members, analysts, etc. At that time, politicians from the Republicans continued to support the decision, while only some members of the Democrats did otherwise.

The US president declared that Iraq is seeking nuclear weapons and may threaten America and the world. Political pressure comes from the right-wing agenda that wants a regime change in Iraq. Economically, the US also had a long series of complex economic problems due to the budget deficit. However, there was also economic manipulation where the rich supported the Republican Party; hence, Bush will have reelection. The focus of discussion on the War in Iraq may hinder the domestic problems in the US from refocusing on global security issues.

Not only politicians but at the time when the US decided to use military force, more than 71% of US citizens supported the decision, while 22% said it was wrong. This is primarily due to the psychological effects of the 9/11 attacks, which affected the US’ perception of Saddam as allegedly involved in the attack. Public pressure, especially after the 9/11 attack in 2001, shadowed US citizens’ support for using military force in Iraq. 

However, after a couple of years, approximately 61% of Americans say that the US should have stayed out of Iraq. President Bush’s approval rating remains low, as 63% disapprove of his leadership. 

A different result of the polls over the years signals that changes in perceptions as the big decision made two decades ago to go to War had a tremendous effect on thousands of lives lost for the Iraqi people and even for the US troops. The consequences of the Iraq war were far-reaching and had a lasting impact on the country and its people. Iran is fueled by spillover effects such as the humanitarian crisis, with estimated 200,000 Iraqis killed along with 5,000 US troops. 

Not only that, but there were also social and political consequences as it failed to protect Iraq’s cultural heritage, which has also resulted in significant damage and looting of important cultural institutions. These consequences also lead to changes in the US citizens’ and politicians’ perceptions and support of the War.

US’s hegemony interest resulted in unnecessary losses.

War in Iraq could have been avoided, but the US still chose a hard approach to ‘diplomacy’ in Iraq that is ineffective and expensive. The hinder justification of the US is likely related to its interest in spreading its global influence and desire to expand control over the oil supply and availability. Of these consequences, the US still wanted to show the world that demonstrates the US is still a global superpower. The US want to spread the idea that the world is more vulnerable than the post-Cold War, especially in security matters. The US assumed they would win a decisive, inexpensive, and good victory in Iraq. The decision the use military force in Iraq is a huge mistake by the US politicians. They got nothing but probably learnt something. The political objectives of the U.S. in nation-building, the collaboration between elite exiles and the U.S. to modify the Iraqi political system to serve their interests, and the unpromising outlook for authentic democracy in Iraq.

How does it relate to the current War in Ukraine? Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has stated that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine cannot be compared to the US-led invasion of Iraq, as the situations are fundamentally different. He noted that Russia invaded a country with a democratically elected president who had not initiated regional conflicts or aggressions against neighbouring countries. In contrast, Saddam Hussein had committed atrocities against his people, engaged in two illegal wars, and used chemical weapons to kill thousands. 

Blair acknowledged that Putin could use the Iraq invasion to justify his actions but argued that he would find another if he didn’t have that excuse. Blair also admitted that the West lost its moral high ground by invading Iraq without a UN Security Council mandate or a formal declaration of War. The goal of removing Saddam Hussein was achieved, but Iraq descended into years of violence that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. The power vacuum ultimately enabled the rise of the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” in Iraq for several years.

In the Russia-Ukraine War, an arrest warrant was issued against Russian President Vladimir Putin by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague due to war crimes. Noting that the Iraq war is also illegal as it violated established principles of international law such as the UN Charter, the Geneva and Hague Conventions, and prohibitions on certain types of weapons. The former US president should also be declared someone with war crimes, but despite this, no U.S. officials have been held accountable for their actions, and no apologies or reparations have been offered.