The war, US has begun in Iraq, is one of the most contradictory topics to discuss. One says it was a huge fail of the USA, other justify this war by national interests and by widespread of democracy. But it has not only positive influence on the situation in Iraq. This war has generated even more problems than not only Iraq but world society had before it. Using the article of Larry Diamond What went wrong in Iraq we should try to define the biggest mistakes that US administration has made; identify the main problems facing Iraq and find out what are the prospect of democracy defined by the author.
Iraq has faced a lot of problems after overthrowing the regime of Saddam Hussein. It was such issues as endemic violence, a shattered state, a nonfunctioning economy, and a decimated society (Diamond). Endemic violence is a usual thing for the state where is many different ethnic and religious groups. In Iraq are living various groups that have conflicts. The most conflictual are Sunni, Shias and Kurds. Also, the longstanding state of war and a rent-seeking behavior among powerful foreign states increase violence and desire of getting profit. All these facts only enable for violence inside of the country.
During last years, Iraq and its economy have survived only because of oil reserves that mostly concentrate in Kirkuk. It is worth mentioning that, Iraq’s Kurds are living there. The Kurdish part of Iraq was always a stumbling block in the state and because of the oil reserves, the authorities have to defer with Kurds. Despite this fact, war is always the main reason for the decrease in the economy in such states.
Over a period of last twenty or even thirty years, Iraq was, of some kind, a combat zone for different groups and foreign states. It, also, was and still is a camp for training terrorists. As a result, it has serious problems with security. In such conditions, it is no wonder that Iraq has decimated society and is in shattered state.
As was said, the war in Iraq is very contradictory topic. During this war and after it the USA has made a lot of mistakes, which determine the way of Iraq’s life now. The main blunder of Bush is security question. He did not get in forces, first of all, the military forces. Iraq really has a security deficit and this fact affects the country the most. The Bush administration has sent not enough troops for safety back-up. In fact, even 300,000 soldiers were more than enough to provide a proper level of security after the war. But, Washington decided to use other tools: haughtiness and ideology. U.S. troops stood by helplessly, outnumbered and unprepared, as much of Iraq's remaining physical, economic, and institutional infrastructure was systematically looted and sabotaged (Diamond). As a result, USA troops and police forces that were created became not defenders but victims.
I agree with Diamond, that security is Bush’s blunder number one. Because, any effort to rebuild a shattered, war-torn country should include four basic components: political reconstruction of a legitimate and capable state; economic reconstruction, including the rebuilding of the country's physical infrastructure and the creation of rules and institutions that enable a market economy; social reconstruction, including the renewal (or in some cases, creation) of a civil society and political culture that foster voluntary cooperation and the limitation of state power; and the provision of general security, to establish a safe and orderly environment (Diamond). In other words, without maintenance of security, there will be no stable and developed economy, no legitimate government and etc. In such postwar situations, which brought a country in state of collapse, security becomes a main thing. There is no need to improve situation in other spheres without safety precautions.
The condition of insecurity has cost a lot of innocent lives. More than 100 Iraqi government workers were killed during the occupation, including several high-level officials and the occupant of the Governing Council's rotating presidency (Diamond). In my opinion, it is one of the worst consequences. Also, insecurity gave much more freedom of acting for different radical religious groups that only raise the level of danger in Iraq.
The next fail is that the United States has no operational strategy for Iraq after the end of the war. Throughout the occupation, the coalition lacked the linguistic and area expertise necessary to understand Iraqi politics and society, and the few long-time experts present were excluded from the inner circle of decision-making in the CPA (Diamond). The coalition did not pay attention to the Iraqi’s attitude towards them. Of course, they were grateful to the US and other coalition countries, but they did not know their real intentions. Also, the colonial past (Great Britain, the former colonial ruler of Iraq) influence this point of view. Some Iraq’s people have different expectations towards the US invasion, but the main hope was that the US will fix all their problems quickly. Too many Iraqis viewed the invasion not as an international effort but as an occupation by Western, Christian, essentially Anglo-American powers, and this evoked powerful memories of previous subjugation and of the nationalist struggles against Iraq's former overlords (Diamond). Besides all these, one of the US officials has dissolved Iraqi army, as a result, it was scattered throughout the country and could not help for coalition troops. Instead of ensuring for this experienced soldiers and officers places in new armed forces of Iraq, they made them a perfect candidates for enlistment in groups of militias. As a result, it created an even more dangerous situation in Iraq.
And the third blunder is the nonexistense of the determination how to deal with various political dangers. It gave an opportunity for various militias come to power. The bright example is Muqtada al-Sadr. Although he lacked the religious knowledge and authority, he managed to build a following among disaffected, unemployed, and poorly educated young men in Iraq's cities (Diamond). It is worth mentioning that he was a bright nationalist and has an anti-American attitude. His followers were openly trained for terror and mayhem. Coalition army has no enough power to fight against Sadr’s forces and against forces of other militias. The US have to deal with these militias, in another case, they could not hold an election that demands Iraq and its religious leaders. This election was necessary for establish Iraqi government that could get power for limitation of using military forces. But as a result, USA has a lack of legitimacy and was unable to hold an election. It tried to establish a transitional parliament, but Ayatollah Sistani rejected it because this parliament would not elect directly and it could give too much power and influence for the USA.
Besides all this assistance and help, people of Iraq want to live in a better place. They wanted security and they ready to work for democratic transformations. They do not want to live with terrorists near their houses and under militia rule. But it should be noted that rebuilding of the country will take a number of years. It is obvious, post-war transition will be long and not without victims. The author sure, that the end of occupation and the transfer of authority to an interim government on June 28 offered at least a chance for a new beginning (Diamond). This transformation needed an international assistance in different spheres, such as military, political and economic. And it is worth mentioning that the USA continues to help Iraq.
Larry Diamond asserts that US invasion of Iraq has negative consequences in most cases. Invasion without UN’s resolution is a violation of international law and it hard to imagine that such action can have a positive result. But, still, in spite of many blunders and inadvertences of US, it managed to somehow improve a situation. US actions give a chance to become a democratic and safe country to Iraq. Yes, their actions, in fact, were beyond the law, but coalition managed to topple a regime of Saddam Hussein and it was one of the biggest victories. Diamond sure, that with international assistance and with the desire of Iraq’s people Iraq can become a democratic state.
I definitely agree with Diamond’s assertions. But, there is no justification for an invasion without UN’s resolution. In fact, it was interference into domestic affairs of another independent state. I think the US had to wait for resolution.
As to assertion about democracy in Iraq, it is hard to imagine. This region is well-known for the rest of the world as a hot point on the world map. Besides, due to civilization theory and geopolitics, democracy as state system does not suit for the Arabic countries, because of their mentality, traditions, and beliefs. Perhaps, Iraq has a chance to become a democratic state, but a way to democracy definitely will be incredibly difficult. It will take a lot of money, international help, and contribution of various foreign players in different spheres. Moreover, the modern world map is the evidence of the impossibility of the existence of democratic Arabic states.
It will be great if Iraq managed to go through such transformations successfully. But it is more real that democratic steps made by US and coalition to bring Iraq to democracy were only the waste of time.
Works cited
Diamond, Larry. "What Went Wrong In Iraq". Council on Foreign Relations. N.p., 2016. Web. 27 July 2016.
Turner, Charles C. Introduction To American Government. Redding, CA: BVT Publishing, 2011. Print.
