Throughout the media, the Iraq War has been much maligned and there is a significant misunderstanding of the reasons for the war, Bush's Mideast policy shift, the connection to the War on Terror and the absolute need for success in Iraq. Detractors of the war claim that Bush brought America to war under false pretenses and falsely point to international opposition to the war to justify their claim. Additionally, opponents of the war do not see any connection to the War on Terror and they wrongly point to sectarian violence in Iraq as symptoms of growing support for terrorism and anti-Americanism. These anti-war activists point to the sectarian violence as the primary reason we should abandon our mission in Iraq, when in fact, it represents the need to step up our efforts in that country. President Bush's war in Iraq represents a significant and dynamic change in American foreign policy, resulting directly from the 9/11 attacks in which the U.S changes its policy from supporting repressive regimes and being reactionary to being proactive, and using the ideals of freedom and security to combat the root causes of terrorism. Further, much of the international resentment of America's policy stems not from principled opposition, but rather from a calculated attack on American hegemony in an attempt to re-establish a bi-polar world.
American Mideast policy over the last half century has been shaped by the Cold War and by prior British policy. Around the world, America was forced to choose the lesser of two evils to stop the spread of communism, and that policy was vital to preventing strategic regions from falling under the Iron Curtain. In Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia, a battle of influence ensued between the USSR and the US and it led to repressive regimes being installed and supported by the US. In Afghanistan, the US supported the Mujahadeen against the Soviets and in Iran, America held up the Shah. While that policy was effective in containing communism, the brutal regimes took their toll on the people of those countries, who largely felt, and still feel powerless. The powerless turned to radical Islam as a beacon of hope and these terrorist organizations lashed out and gained a significant amount of power. Radical Islam's first success was toppling the US supported Shah in Iran and led to the installation of the radical, anti-American, anti-Western theocracy that exists now in Iran. The increasing support and power of the radical Islamic movement is what led to the attacks on the USS Cole and the 9/11 attacks among others.
The toppling of the Shah in Iran is the perfect example of what can happen if strong dictatorships are overthrown. It was a very negative result for America. With the end of the Cold War, it became possible for America to change our policy with regard to the Middle East. Since repression and despair are the root causes of the turn to radical Islam and terrorism, Bush's policy became one of addressing the root causes of terror rather than supporting dictatorships. The clear theory is that if the people of the Middle East have hope, security and live in freedom, they will turn away from radical Islam, as radical Islam will lose its popular appeal.
Iraq represented a good starting point for the new policy of addressing potential threats and attacking the root causes of terrorism. Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, his people were repressed, living in poverty and fear, and he had defied the United States. The confluence of these factors represented a potential threat to the United States, as well as an opportunity. Our policy was to remove Saddam Hussein and replace his repressive regime with a democratic regime, a new government that would embrace the free market, provide security to the Iraqi people, freedom and opportunity. The theory is that freedom and opportunity for the Iraqi people would represent a more attractive alternative to radical Islam, and that Iraq would become a model for reform throughout the Middle East and serve notice to repressive regimes elsewhere that they would need to reform. As a result, radical Islam would lose its base of support.
The idea of attacking the root causes of terror, unfortunately, is not recognized by the political left within its myopic vision that attacking a nation that hasn't directly threatened you is illegal. The big picture suggests that Iraq is a front in the larger War on Terror which is a battle between the Western virtues of freedom and tolerance and radical Islam which seeks rigid conformity and dominance of the world. The Iraq War represents a deviation from the Cold War American policy of supporting brutal dictators and returns America to the role of expanding freedom worldwide. It is a role we have the luxury of assuming as the world's lone superpower.
Opposition to the Iraq War began early, with France as the international leader. Then French President Jacques Chirac opposed the idea of America being the world's lone superpower and sought for the EU to replace the USSR as the world's second superpower. He used the Iraq War as a means for doing so, using resentment of America to oppose the American invasion of Iraq, and thus dramatically increase the difficulty of the occupation. Additionally, the opposition put the spotlight on the occupation, and led the U.S to conform to politically acceptable "peacekeeping" tactics rather than utilize the force needed for an effective occupation. As a result, America failed to effectively secure Iraq, leading to citizens to turn to warlords and terrorist groups to provide them with security, which is the cause of the current sectarian violence.
The sectarian violence that exists within Iraq is essentially a microcosm of the general state and causes of the rise of militant Islam in the Mideast. The vast majority of the deaths in Iraq are Iraqi on Iraqi resulting from a power vaccum. Essentially, with the regime toppled, and no infrastructure or protection in place, Iraqis reverted to a state of nature, and pledged alliegance to the most powerful warlords for protection. With nothing in place to protect them, and with the Americans unable to do so, Iraqis had to turn to warlords. Similarly, living under a brutal regime, many Arabs turn to militant Islam for their protection and change. The troop surge has reestablished more security, and consequently, these bands of warlords are disbanding and there are fewer deaths in Iraq.
The Iraq War is an example of a bold policy by President Bush to stop supporting repressive regimes, to topple tyrants and to spread freedom. Freedom is the alternative to radical Islam and the more it is allowed to flourish the more pressure it puts on repressive regimes in the Middle East to reform. Reform will undermine the support for radical Islam and win the War on Terror.
Comments