Introduction
The Iraq War, sometimes known as the Second Gulf War, was a global battle that took place between the years 2003 and 2011. This fight had weighty consequences for the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East and its influence on world politics and the field of international relations. There were many reasons for the conflict, including political and economic factors; the phenomenon elicited extensive global resistance, giving rise to demonstrations, discussions, and diplomatic conflicts. Under Pope John Paul II, the Vatican advocated for diplomatic solutions throughout the Iraq War, highlighting the intricacies of international mediation and the difficulties of peace advocacy during wartime.
War Causes
Claims of Destructive Weapons
There was a confluence of forces over many years, if not decades, that led to the outbreak of war in Iraq. Here are some of the more important ones: claims of destruction weapons, promotion of democracy and regime change, terrorism link perception, and oil resources. The first reason for the war was the claim about the mass destruction of weapons.
One of the primary rationales for the invasion was predicated on the perception that Iraq harbored an arsenal of weapons of mass devastation, including chemical, biological, and maybe nuclear armaments. The George W. Bush administration contended that Iraq’s acquisition of these weapons was a significant threat to global security. Somerville (2023) confirms that “This was deeply concerning to collective security since Iraq had deployed chemical weapons such as mustard gas, tabun, sarin and VX between 1983-1987, killing approximately 20,000 Iranians” (p. 93). This quotation exemplifies the apprehension and preoccupation arising from Iraq’s possession and past deployment of mass destruction weapons, which fostered the perception that Iraq represented a substantial threat to global peace and security.
Perception of Terrorism Links
The second cause of the war was the terrorism links perception. Following the events of the 9/11 attacks, assertions were made about alleged connections between Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship and terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda. However, further investigations and analyses have since refuted these accusations.
The Bush administration posited that Iraq had the potential to provide assistance or serve as a sanctuary for terrorist organizations. During his 2002 State of the Union speech, President Bush said, “Iraq continue[d] to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror” (Starobinets, 2020, p. 9). Bush explained that nations like Iraq, together with their affiliated terrorist factions, form a collective entity that might be characterized as an axis of malevolence to jeopardize global tranquility. President George added and insisted that the Iraqi government had previously used chemical weapons to execute mass killings against a huge number of its citizens.
Oil Resources
Apart from the two causes, it is true that the oil scramble equally agitated the war. Haiphong and Martinez (2022) quoted Alan Greenspan, who was the former United States (US) Federal Reserve Chair, “It is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil” (p. 221). This statement suggests that Iraq’s second-largest oil reserves were essential to the US and its allies. The fight may preserve oil supplies, affect pricing, and prevent future contenders from gaining control over these possessions.
Promotion of Democracy and Regime Change
The fourth cause was to seek democracy and remove the regime of that time. The Bush Administration was to overthrow the government led by Saddam Hussein, seeing him as an autocratic ruler who did not care for his people (Saidin, 2022). He thought Hussein to have presented a noteworthy risk to the region’s overall stability. The goal of endorsing democracy in the Middle East was likewise articulated explicitly with the hope that a post-Saddam Iraq would serve as an example for nurturing democratic transformation.
Furthermore, President Bush accused Saddam of engaging in acquisitions of hazardous chemicals to manufacture nuclear weapons of mass devastation. Bush highlighted that one of the key threats in the combat against terrorism was represented by noncompliant governments like Iraq. Iraq held chemical and biological weapons that might potentially be acquired by terrorist groups (Saidin, 2022). Such activities portrayed Hussein as a dictator in Iraq and violated human rights.
War Opposition
International Opposition
The Iraq War encountered significant constructive criticism domestically and internationally. The resistance was based on many issues and arguments, such as inaccurate evidence on mass destruction weapons and humanitarian concerns. Regarding the guns, there was no clear proof; Chang (2023) reported Dr. Blix’s statement, “Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament which was demanded…” (p. 316).
Blix was the United Nations weapon inspector, a senior person whose statement could be trusted. Blix expounded that the United Nations Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) had a satisfactory understanding of Iraq’s industrial and scientific capabilities (Siracusa & Visser, 2019). Furthermore, except for the few empty chemical weapons that were uncovered during the first declaration, no further findings were made. Subsequently, this information asserted that the war had been initiated under deceptive justifications, resulting in the gradual erosion of public confidence and the reputation of the involved parties.
Civilian and Humanitarian Opposition
Similarly, other oppositions to war were civilian and humanitarian individuals. Humanitarian concerns were pronounced due to the war’s terrible effects on people and infrastructure; it only had negative results. The potential for extensive instability, population dislocation, and death were mentioned as reasons for war opposition. Pope John Paul II opposed the war; he powerfully emphasized the need to negotiate and use peaceful methods to address the disagreement rather than opting for military involvement.
Smytsnyuk (2023) expounds that “Even in cases that the international community and Holy See undoubtedly view as wars of aggression, the Vatican will call for diplomatic solutions, rather than allude to a military…” (p. 5). The Vatican’s penchant for nonviolent conflict settlement and devotion to international law was the foundation for this Pope’s tactic. Pope held that dialogue was better than war for settling international conflicts since no mass bloodshed or property destruction would occur.
The Pope went as far as selecting two cardinals to aid in bringing peace between Bush and Saddam. Allen Jr (2023) explains that French Cardinal Roger Etchegaray was sent to engage in a meeting with Saddam Hussein. On returning, Etchegaray testified that Saddam was yearning and willing to end the fight. Conversely, Cardinal Pio Laghi was assigned to talk with Bush and his administration to articulate the fears of the Pope and the probable implications of military involvement in Iraq (Allen Jr, 2023). These efforts confirm the Pope’s commitment to peace and faith in diplomacy and conversation to resolve international issues; his missions show the Vatican’s worldwide involvement and attempts to avert bloodshed and foster peace.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Iraq War happened between 2003 and 2011 and resulted in serious ramifications. The war faced substantial resistance due to suspicions of mass destruction of weapons, unproven terrorist networks, access to oil resources, and the wish for regime change and the establishment of democracy. Nonetheless, critics raised concerns over erroneous accusations, humanitarian considerations, and a preference for peaceful settlements. The Vatican, led by Pope John Paul II, arose as a prominent activist in voicing opposition to the war, accentuating the need for diplomacy and peaceful resolutions. Notwithstanding these efforts, the war advanced, therefore emphasizing the intricacies of global diplomacy and the difficulties encountered in advocating for peace during hostile periods.
References
Allen Jr, J. (2023). US president meets a papal envoy pleading for peace, and a cruel case of deja Vu. Catholic Herald. Web.
Chang, G. C. (2023). Extending the Idea System to the War on Iraq. In Revolution and Witchcraft: The Code of Ideology in Unsettled Times. Cham: Springer International Publishing. 310-330. Web.
Haiphong, D., & Martinez, C. (2022). The universalization of “Liberal Democracy”. International Critical Thought, 12(2), 214-224. Web.
Saidin, M. I. S. (2022). US foreign policy, neo-conservatism and the Iraq war (2003-2011): Critical reviews of factors and rationales. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 9(1), 1-12. Web.
Siracusa, J. M., & Visser, L. J. (2019). George W. Bush, diplomacy, and going to war with Iraq, 2001-2003. Diplomasi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 1-27. Web.
Smytsnyuk, P. (2023). The holy see confronts the war in Ukraine: Between just war theory and nonviolence. ET-Studies–Journal of the European Society for Catholic Theology, 14, 3-19. Web.
Somerville, L. (2023). The Iraq war: The relationship between legal and moral rules and collective security. Political Science Undergraduate Review, 8(1), 90-94. Web.
Starobinets, A. (2020). PSC 393. A war of deception: The symbolic politics of the Iraq war. 1-21. Web.