Essay Example on US Attack on Iraq: Theories and Evidence

There are many theories that have been formed to explain why the United States attacked Iraq. Among the theories is that the attack was a preventive war to that was targeted on the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The top leaders in the US government including President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were not however convinced by neoconservatives following 9/11 to attack Iraq. There is some evidence that these leaders desired to transform Iraq leadership even before assuming office and the September 11 attack only gave them the opportune time to advance their desires. The neoconservatives had been apparently pressuring for regime change in Iraq for a long time, and it is, therefore, possible that they were given the top advisory positions since they advocated for what President Bush and his colleagues wanted and were in pursuit of. To clearly understand the motivation of the invasion, the shared interests of these leaders should be determined. The history of Cheney and Rumsfeld is now clear than it was back then, and they have come to be characterized as realists, unwilling to intervene in a military manner. The Iraq invasion was motivated by various reasons and not to end the threat about weapons of mass destruction.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The US invaded Iraq to end the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Bush and his administration earnestly believed that Saddam Hussein had active WMD programs. Jervis believes that the judgment was similar to that of the American intelligence, which was not politically inclined and that even other countries that were against the war agreed with this investigation. Jervis supports his argument by saying that the frenetic search for WMD following the invasion, together with leaders' discomfort in not getting any WMD, is further evidence that leaders believed that Saddam had active WMD programs. There was no evidence that Saddam possessed WMD, but the US government, along with the British, feared future threats. If Saddam had active WMD programs, the Bush administration would have called a presser to make a war statement. Alternatively, they would have requested a comprehensive national intelligence estimates to make a case with other legislators concerning the alleged imminent national security threat. Other foreign intelligence all concurred that Iraq had no threat of WMD except for small traces of biological and chemical weapons and active programs were possible since Sadam Hussein had them in the past, but there was no current proof of having them.

The United States invaded Iraq as an attempt to institute democracy in the Middle East, beginning with Iraq. Bush and his administration envisaged the overthrowing Saddam Hussein and the foundation of democracy in Iraq as a chief project. The vision was the birth child of neoconservatives who sought to depose Saddam Hussein and also undermine other autocratic regimes in the Middle East that buttressed terrorism in any way. The US top leaders and neoconservatives believed that establishing democracy in Iraq would incite a sequence of democratic dominions in the region. Bush and his colleagues were realists before the 9/11 as they were reluctant to use military force generally, and were contemptuous of using military force globally for philosophical goals. The 9/11 offered the US an opportunity to strategize how they would handle national security threats. The US in the National Security Strategy declared that they had the liberty to promote free trade and democracy even outside their boundaries. Those who favored this strategy claim that it is the best since it provided a long term solution to completely overwhelm anti-American terrorists from the region. As proclaimed in the Project of the New American Century, the Bush administration saw an opportunity to globalize American leadership.

The US invaded Iraq as a way of lobbying for Israel's security. Following 9/11, neoconservatives in the Bush administration and Israel lobby leaders and the Congress convinced the government to invade Iraq as they believed the attack was focused on gaining security interests for both the US and Israel. Therefore, while it is generally agreed that Israel lobby is greatly influential in numerous United States foreign policy decisions, it is believed that in the Iraq invasion, the lobby contributed to selling the invasion to the Congress and the American populace. There is no evidence that the lobby persuaded or prevailed over the President and the unitary executive branch. Further, while the policies favored by the lobby and those taken by the government agreed, the goals of the Bush administration disagreed significantly from those of the neoconservatives and the Israel lobby. The invasion of Iraq was meant to make Israel safe in the Middle East.

The US also invaded Iraq because they had an apparent national interest in controlling the Persian Gulf oil to safeguard the United States' economic interests and equilibrium of the global economy. The renowned admission of this argument was made by Allan Greenspan, who instigated much controversy in 2007 by saying that the US was trying to take control of the second-largest oil reserve field by overthrowing Saddam Hussein. From many of the Bush administration speeches and reports, it is evident that Saddam Hussein was the chief obstacle in maintaining an adequate oil supply to the US and the west. One of the most evident speeches is that of Cheney who showed intentions that the United States wanted to transform the Middle East, with Iraq being the central target for change. Cheney said that to meet the global demand for oil and maintain the economic growth 50 million more barrels of oil a day had to be provided by 2010. Cheney warned on an oil crisis unless global oil companies had access to the increasingly nationalized Middle East oil reserves. Oil prices heightened significantly during the 2000 presidential campaign, where Presidential candidate George Bush continued to echo the narrative about the oil crisis.

The Iraq invasion was also instigated by the effort of the Bush administration to prove the American primacy. Cheney and Rumsfeld decided to advance the US primacy in two ways. Firstly, the US president required to be disencumbered in the pursuit of US foreign policy objectives. Secondly, the United States should possess the highest technologically advanced and superior military force in the universe in what Rumsfeld calls the military revolution. Rumsfeld and Cheney incited Bush to use his powers as outlined in the unitary executive theory. They believed that achieving the US primacy was the best way to further the national interests of the US. Rumsfeld had the dream of transforming the US military to strengthen it by raising the military budget and making a more high-tech force. Rumsfeld and Cheney had persistently advocated for the adoption of the Defence Policy Guidance Plan (DPGP) by Wolfowitz that was meant to make the US a global force. Following 9/11, Rumsfeld saw the opportunity to prove the might of the US primacy.

Conclusion

The Iraq invasion was instigated by many factors. Among the inciters, the efforts to end a WMD threat appears to have been a fabricated narrative. There was no evidence to prove that Saddam Hussein had active WMD programs and all that could be found were remnants of chemical and biological compounds. There is some evidence that the Bush regime wanted to implement ideas in PNAC to prove American primacy, by influencing international politics. The theory of invading Iraq to control oil reserves sells widely since there is rich evidence from reports and the Bush administration leaders' speeches.