Introduction
Hello everybody, and thank you for listening to this podcast! My name is First Name Last Name, and today, as part of the Threats to U.S. National Security course, I will be discussing the Iraqi Civil War. Firstly, I should note that as part of the assignment for this course, I wrote a case study on the Iraqi Civil War In 2014-2017. As part of my research, I uncovered unusual factors that explain the involvement of the United States’ military forces and their role in this Civil War. The United States’ national security is connected to the ability to eliminate the activity of ISIS in this region. At the end of this podcast, all sources that were used will be provided to ensure that listeners can further investigate this topic on their own.
I chose to discuss the Iraqi Civil War since many Americans have heard of this conflict, including myself, mainly because the United States military forces were present on this territory from 2003 and were reinvited by the government in 2014. The concept of political realism suggests that states concerned with their own security are the main actors in the international arena. Considering the U.S. involvement in the Iraqi conflict, political realism means that the American forces protected the national interests that were threatened by the terrorist groups gaining power in the Iraqi territory.
Description
Firstly, let us focus on how the events unfolded in Iraq throughout 2014-2017. I know that many Americans, including myself, are familiar with this conflict. Mainly, this is because the deployment of forces to Iraq and Iran is discussed in the media and by President Trump with various claims made regarding the U.S. military in the region. Moreover, the President claimed that the military forces defeated ISIS, which would imply safety for the American and international community. However, the US-Iraq relationship has been strenuous recently. Hence, we will begin by exploring how the events unfolded in 2014 and the involvement of the U.S. forces.
The conflict was initiated by ISIS in 2014 when its forces capture several cities and proclaimed the territory as an independent state. This happened at the beginning of August, while the American forces came to Iraq in June. Over the course of 2015-2016, the American forces, together with military support from other nations, were able to secure a large amount of territory that was controlled by the terrorists (Stefanie, 2018). The battle of Mosul signified a defeat of ISIS since they no longer had any territory under their control, and the final campaign titled the Western Iraq Campaign expelled ISIS militant forces from Iraq completely.
Why the Iraqi War Happened?
Now, the involvement of the United States forces in this conflict is an interesting element because I think that suppression of terrorism in the Middle East is a critical factor for national security. In 2014, when ISIS proclaimed its Islamic State, which was not recognized by the others, the Iraqi government issued authorization for the U.S. military. Notably, this was not the first instance of America’s presence in the region since, in 2003, the U.S. invaded this territory (Costantini and O’Driscoll, 2019). This move was connected to al-Qaeda’s operations in Iraq, which lasted until 2011. The U.S. involvement is mainly directed at the protection of national interests and combatting terrorism since Iraq is a fragile state.
Iraq has been a fragile state for years, which allowed the militant terrorist groups to operate within its territory for years. The definition of a fragile state implies that it is a developing nation that struggles to state capacity and legitimacy. This lack of authority results in an extreme vulnerability that, in the case of Iraq, allowed ISIS to establish a full-scale armed conflict. The instability of Iraq was reflected in a constant confrontation of the two main parties – the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (Johannes, 2017). For the listeners unfamiliar with the specifics of the Iraqi conflict, I should note that Kurds are an ethnic group that resides in different regions of the Middle East and Asia, including Iraq.
The United States had military units in the Iraqi territory for years, not allowing the conflict between the government and supporters of a Sunni Muslim state to engage in direct conflict. However, O’Driscoll (2017) states that one day after the American forces left this state, the government issued an arrest warrant for the vice president, allegedly because he supported the extremist, which lead to an intensification of conflict between the opposing parties. It seems that the Iraq government struggles with managing the conflict, which can result in an escalation in the future, the implications of which we will discuss later. Although ISIS focused its operations in Iraq, the activity of this terrorist group is a threat to America and the other communities.
ISIS’s main objective was to create a state based on the principles of Sunni Islam – across Iraq and Syria. As I mentioned, the lack of proper leadership allowed extremist groups to develop, leveraging the religious and geopolitical dimensions of the conflict. I should note that this conflict also has an ideological aspect to it, since the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, as well as supporters of radical Islam, were actively promoting their autonomy since 1970.
Course Theories
When considering theories that can be applied to understand the implications of the Iraqi Civil War better, I would say that political realism offers many insights. According to an article by Jackson, Sørensen, and Jackson, and Møller (2017), political realism is based on competitiveness and conflict as opposed to a more ideological approach of liberalism. The authors argue that the principal actors of international relationships are states engaged in conflict, and the main objective is to ensure national security or obtain power. This theory can explain why the United States had such a great involvement in this conflict since after the events of 9/11 and various terrorist attacks in Europe in recent years, the issue of terrorism has become increasingly important.
Next, I think that the general theory of international relationships is applicable here as well. Černy (2017) states that the explanatory and constitutive theory can explain the development of the nationalist movement in Iraq, which did not comply with the constitution and political order of the state. Generally, the spectrum theory suggests that a variety of factors contributed to the intensification of nationalism and terrorism within this territory, including geopolitical factors, the national identity of Kurds, and others.
National Security
Since the United States was involved in the Iraqi conflict, one can assume that it has implications for national security. As I mentioned, the American military forces were dispatched to the area under President Obama, in cooperation with the Iraqi government. This move was strategically important because if ISIS succeeded in seizing power, the scope of terrorist threats for America would be unimaginable. For instance, in his article Mitchell (2018) notes that the involvement of America’s forces is natural for a civilized society. The idea is that because it is a global power, and such conflict can escalate and affect other states as well, the involvement of the U.S. is justified.
The main question here is, does America ensures its safety and eliminate the threat of terrorist attacking its citizens by supporting the Civil Conflict, or is it making it more vulnerable to the impact of the extremist groups? The democratic principles imply that participating in a conflict of a different state and supporting one state is unjust; however, in the case of Iran, extremism of the opposing party matters. Technically speaking, this conflict has ended. However, the Iraqi war and the role of the U.S. in its present some points of consideration for the future, such as strategies that can help detect the increasing activity of terrorist organizations to make certain that they do not cause similar regional conflicts.
International Relationships
Similar to the concerns for national security, the threat of terrorism is also relevant to the international community. ISIS, in particular, is successful in fostering extremism in different states (Pokalova, 2018). The terrorist acts in Brussels, Istambul, and Paris are only some examples of the tragic events that are a result of ISIS’s activity, and I would say that considering this tragic history, the international community has to treat the problem of terrorism more seriously.
Pokalova (2018) also highlights another important factor – the use of communication technology, which allows ISIS to recruit followers not only in the Middle East but globally. This, of course, is a treat to the security of all states. Moreover, the scope of work that intelligence agencies have to conduct in order to track and mitigate ISIS recruiters via the Internet is enormous. Here, the question of how states in Europe and the U.S. can enable their security if ISIS remains active and continues to use the Internet to support its operations internationally remains valid.
I guess there is no easy and straightforward answer to this question, apart from the cooperation between different agencies. The presence of the U.S. military in the state is essential for combating the militant forces of ISIS and gives a chance to actually destroy this terrorist organization. I think that misunderstanding the capabilities of terrorist organizations is very dangerous, as the Americans found out on 9/11. The government and military have to do everything in their power to make it impossible for ISIS agents to recruit new followers and plan for further operations.
Implications for the Future
The war ended in 2017, with the defeat of ISIS forces in Iraq. Although this victory is essential, it would be foolish to consider the conflict between the U.S. and terrorists as finished. Terrorist continues their activity, although now it is the guerrilla warfare and small-scale conflicts that occur from time to time. Iraq remains to be a fragile state, and the war aggravated the social conflict between Sunni Muslims and the rest of the population (Costantini and O’Driscoll, 2019). And since the terrorists did not recognize their defeat, I would assume that they are looking for ways to re-emerge and continue the civil conflict.
The focus on counter-terrorism actions and international cooperation can address the threat of ISIS. Currently, the United States military awaits confirmation from the Iraqi government to extend their stay in the state, which is an essential factor. As shown by the historical overview, the American forces support peace in the region, which is quite fragile still. Apart from another armed conflict, there is a threat of Iraq splitting into two states, which would create problems in terms of social, political, and economic life (Costantini and O’Driscoll, 2019).
Conclusion
To conclude, in accordance with the political realism theory, the United States pursued national security interests when participating in the Iraqi Civil War, which helped combat the increasing impact of ISIS. I want to finish this podcast by saying that the peace in Iraq appears to be quite fragile. This means that the U.S. and the international community have to work on a solution to address the problem of terrorism.
If you want to explore this issue further, I recommend reading Iraqi Kurdistan, the PKK, and International Relations: Theory and Ethnic Conflict by Hannes (2017), where the author extensively outlines the history of the conflict and the implications for the future. Despite the Iraqi and American forces winning the conflict, the threat of terrorism for the global community remains valid as ISIS still exists, and Iraq remains a fragile state. This is everything I wanted to cover regarding the Iraqi Civil War and its effect on national and international security, thank you for listening.
References
Černy, Hannes. 2017. Iraqi Kurdistan, the PKK and International Relations: Theory and Ethnic Conflict. New York: Routledge.
Costantini, Irene, and Dylan O’Driscoll. 2019. “Practices of Exclusion, Narratives of Inclusion: Violence, Population Movements and Identity Politics in Post-2014 Northern Iraq.” Ethnicities: 1-20.
Jackson, Richard, Georg Sørensen, and Jørgen Møller. 2019. Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jüde, Johannes. 2017. “Contesting Borders? The Formation of Iraqi Kurdistan’s De Facto State.” International Affairs 93, no. 4: 847-63.
Mitchell, Stefanie. 2018. “Exploring United States Involvement in Post-ISIL Iraq.” Editorial Welcome 3, no. 1: 59-86.
O’Driscoll, Dylan. 2017. “Autonomy Impaired: Centralisation, Authoritarianism and the Failing Iraqi State.” Ethnopolitics 16, no. 4: 315-32.
Pokalova, Elena. 2019. “Driving Factors Behind Foreign Fighters in Syria and Iraq.” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 42, no. 9: 798-818.