Liberalist's The Persian Gulf War example essay topic

Introduction Wars have been apart of this world almost as long as anything else has. Even in the Bible days there are records of wars. There are many reasons that states choose to go to war. Sometimes it is for the expansion of a nation or state, other times it is for financial gains, and it also could be for security or defense purposes. Whatever the case may be, wars have been apart of human life and will always be. There were no differences when it came to the Persian Gulf War.

This war involved the United States, Iraq, and Kuwait. When trying to determine the purpose behind this war I chose to view it from a comparison of both the realist and liberalist views on the war. The Case The Persian Gulf War stemmed from tension over long-term border issues and oil possession disputes between Iraq and Kuwait. Iraq had long claimed Kuwait to be part of Iraq. Kuwait was part of the Ottoman Empire until 1899 when it asked for, and received, British protection in return for autonomy in local affairs.

In 1961 when Britain granted Kuwait independence, Iraq revived an old claim that Kuwait was rightfully theirs since it had been governed as part of an Ottoman province in southern Iraq. Only after intense global pressure did Iraq recognize Kuwait in 1963, though there still were clashes along the Iraqi - Kuwait border. When Iraq went to war with Iran, Kuwait assisted Iraq with loans and diplomatic backing in hope that this would ease tensions between them and for a while it did. After the Iran - Iraq War ended, the Iraqi government launched a costly program of reconstruction. After Iraq had fallen $80 billion in debt, it demanded that Kuwait forgive its share of the debt and to help them with other payments. Also at this time, Iraq was claiming that Kuwait was pumping oil from a field that was evenly between the Iraqi - Kuwaiti border and was not sharing the revenue.

Iraq also accused Kuwait of producing more oil than was allowed under limits set by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), thereby depressing the price of oil, Iraq's main export. As Iraq's complaints against Kuwait grew increasingly harsh, Iraq began to mobilize its troops near Kuwaiti border. Kuwait decided not to call on the United States or other non-Arab powers for support. The United States and others agreed not to get involved. Knowing this information, on August 2, 1990, Iraq quickly invaded Kuwait and seized control of the small nation. In the next couple of days, the United States, along with the United Nations, demanded that Iraq withdraw immediately. U.S. and other UN member nations began sending troops to Saudi Arabia within the week and the world - wide coalition began to form under UN authority.

Allied forces bombed the Iraqi military and use ground forces to quickly liberate Kuwait (Grossman, 16). Realism Theory Realism tends to focus on the struggle for power between states in an anarchic international system. The major actors of realism are the states themselves. Realism presents a realistic view of international relations and focuses primarily on how the world is literally, rather than how it ought to be.

Realist believes that states are rational, unitary actors whose aim is to enhance their power and security by all means. There is evidence that Iraq was a unitary actor who, just as the realists believe, fought in order to enhance its power and security. Though, some could argue that the Persian Gulf War was justified, there is sufficient evidence that concludes otherwise. Whether or not the public considered the Persian Gulf War justifiable, the main issue is that it was a battle that resulted in the death of thousands of lives, both soldiers and civilians. Realist Analysis The Persian Gulf War was far from being a just war because of all the violence and killings that occurred, while fighting. Evidence proves that the Persian Gulf War was simply a massacre of Iraqi soldiers and civilians in an all out, no holds bar, battle.

Thousands of Iraqi soldiers and innocent citizens lost their lives as a result of this senseless war. According to Albert Bin, "the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency estimated 100,000 Iraqi military deaths" (Bin, 237). Philip Taylor adds, "the United States had only 148 killed in action, 458 wounded, and 121 died through non combat incidents" (Taylor, 102). The United States victory was the most lopsided in recent history, in terms of numbers who died when looking at both sides. Casualties did not only occur during the progress of the war, "about 12,000 Iraqi civilians died during the war, and 5,000 civilians died since the end of the war due to wounds, lack of medical care, or malnutrition" (Lopez 1991). These statistics reinforce the realist belief concerning wars because of the numerous deaths that resulted from the Persian Gulf War; That is, the casualty count of the war supports the belief that the war was inadequate and preposterous due to the lack of concern for lives, rather the concern for substantial power and stability.

Both Iraq and the United States were at war only because they both had oil interests that would help to expand either state's power. The United States savage bombing campaign caused most of the Iraqi deaths. The air campaign of the United States was very successful in terms of doing what it set out to do and that was to bomb everything that supported Iraq's war. This even includes some civilian facilities. Nothing was safe; Radar installations, military airfields, bunkers, electric power plants, highways, water treatment facilities, and commercial airports were all targets. After only a week, Baghdad had no water or electricity (Stiles, 142).

With Baghdad not having water or electricity, this not only affected soldiers, but also had a detrimental effect on civilians. Alberto Bin states, "United States forces dropped some 9,000 precision-guided bombs and 210,000 conventional bombs" (Bin, 235). Looking at the amount of each type of bomb dropped, one could easily conclude that a majority of the bombs were conventional and were not precision guided. With the slightest miscalculations, those conventional bombs could easily hit civilians. On February 13, U.S. stealth fighter bombs destroyed the Amiri ya bomb shelter in Baghdad, killing 600-1000 civilians (Economist, 1991). The United States war against the citizens of Iraq was brutal and inhumane.

The United States intentionally deprived the Iraqi people of essential medicines, portable water, food and other necessities. The United States wanted to break the will of the Iraqi people, they attempted to destroy their economic capability, to deprive them of essential human needs and services, and to reduce their numbers and weaken their health. To accomplish these cruel tasks, the U.S. imposed and enforced embargoes preventing the shipment of medicines, infant milk formula, water purifies, and food and other supplies that were needed. The U.S. government froze Iraq's funds and influenced other nations to do so also, resulting in the lack of Iraq's ability to purchase needed medicines, food, and other supplies. The U.S. also prevented a number of international organizations, governments, and relief agencies from providing Iraq with needed supplies and also from obtaining any information concerning such needs (Saddam's Iraq, 64).

Thousands of innocent people died as a result of these acts. The United States seemed to directly target citizens in some of their bombings, such as the bombing of cities, highways, and bridges. George Lopez states, "the military necessity of waging war against first order military and industrial military support targets meant that targets within cities would be heavily bombed, and that civilians would die. Among the early major targets were bridges and highways leading south of Baghdad and Basra and from other Iraqi cities toward the Iranian and Jordanian borders. Some of the heaviest civilian casualties appeared to be among those taking these routes to flee the bombing of Baghdad. American spokesman claimed to believe that Saddam Hussein was moving SCUD missiles and possibly chemical and biological weapons in civilian trucks and buses, and that the roads and bridges were being used to re-supply units in Kuwait" (Lopez 1991).

The bombing and collective killing of the citizens of Iraq was all apart of the United States' goal to enhance its power and security. As the realists would assume, the United States acted rationally during the Persian Gulf War. Thinking rationally, the United States knew it had to stretch the truth a little in order to continue its war efforts. With a fear of the U.S. citizens condemning the war, the U.S. told many lies to keep the American people backing the war.

Philip Taylor states that "to tell the truth in wartime is unpatriotic, treasonous, unfair to our brave men and women in uniform, ungrateful to our wise and heroic leaders. To tell the truth in wartime is to invite scorn and obloquy" (Suter 1991). In October, the United States government knew that the American people would not support a war simply to protect U.S. oil interests, so this is why the Iraqi injustices inside Kuwait became the "just cause" for the U.S. military action (Lopez 1991). The U.S. used this cause, which would consider the war justifiable; to further its interests in Kuwait's oil fields. They knew that by helping Kuwait by liberating it from Iraq would help them in their quest for oil interests a great deal. Col. David Hack worth states, "the Gulf War was one big lie from beginning to inconclusive end" (Carpenter, 10).

There were a lot of lies told during the Persian Gulf War in order to rally the American people behind our president. Some people even believe that the United States used deception to lure Iraq into war with Kuwait so that the U.S. could be looked at as a hero when it intervened. At the early stages of the conflict there were examples of the United States' deception. In the beginning, the U.S. showed absolutely no sign of opposition to Iraq's increasing threats against Kuwait. Even when Saddam Hussein requested U.S. Ambassador, April Glas pie, to explain State Department views in Congress about Iraq's threats against Kuwait, she assured him that the U.S. considered the dispute to be a regional concern, and that it would not intervene military (Chomsky 1991). In other words, the U.S. government gave Saddam Hussein what was considered the equivalent to a "green light" to invade Kuwait.

Getting this assurance from the United States, Iraq quickly attacked Kuwait. Soon after, the United States moved in to liberate Kuwait from the Iraqi military, in spite of their promise. According to Noam Chomsky, "the United States knowingly intended to lead Iraq into a provocation that could be used to justify intervention and warfare by U.S. military forces for the real purpose of destroying Iraq as a military power and seizing Arab oil fields in the Persian Gulf" (Chomsky 1991). This would be the perfect scenario and excuse for the U.S. to indulge in its oil interests of the Gulf region. The United States succeeded in its plan and was look on by the rest of the world as the protectors of the weak.

The United States also lied about the diplomatic phase of the war in which they accused Saddam Hussein of rejecting diplomatic solutions to the conflict. When, in fact, it was the United States who consistently rejected and ridiculed Iraq's efforts to negotiate a peaceful resolution, beginning with Iraq's August 12, 1990, proposal, largely ignored, and ending with its mid February 1991 peace offer which the U.S. called a "cruel hoax. ". The United States consistently insisted there would be no negotiation, no compromise, no face saving, no reward for aggression (Khadduri, 63).

The United States denied Iraq any chances of settling the disputes through diplomatic solutions. Liberalism Theory Although one could look at the war from a realist's point of view and say that the war was not just, one could just as easily view the war from the liberalist's point of view and say that it was a last resort and it was justified. Liberalists see the world and conflicts of the world in a totally different light than realists do. Comparing liberalist's and realists is almost the equivalent of comparing day to night. Liberalists focus on enhancing global political and economic cooperation. Liberalism's major actors include states, international organizations, multinational corporations, and nongovernmental organizations.

Liberalists believe that states are not always rational actors and that there is a compromise between various interests within the state. Liberalists believe that a state's goal should be economic prosperity and international stability. Liberalism is a very optimistic theory. Liberalists, just like realists, believe that the condition of the international system in anarchic, but the difference is that liberalist's believe that it is possible to mitigate anarchy (Genest, 123).

Liberalists would look at the Persian Gulf War and all of its reasons and say that it was a must that we protect Kuwait from Iraq. According to liberalist's the Persian Gulf War would be a prime example of a "just war". Liberalist Analysis The ability of the U.S. to form a coalition to help liberate Kuwait would fit right in with the liberalist's' idea of collective security. According to Marc Genest, "collective security is a system in which states band together to safeguard the territorial independence and security of one another against aggression" (Genest, 125). Through the use of collective security, force used by one state would be defeated or discouraged by a combination of all states in a system working together. President George Bush of the United States made it clear to the American people that he was determined to restore the legitimate government to Kuwait.

The U.S. and Britain were the first Western countries to protest the invasion of Kuwait. As British interests in the Gulf declined, the duty of protecting Kuwait and its oil fields fell on American shoulders. President Bush knew that he had to seek the cooperation of Western and Arab countries in or to carry out his plan through the United Nations. Bush especially looked towards Saudi Arabia and Egypt, whose participation was thought of as absolutely necessary for any political and military action to be taken against Iraq (Khadduri, 124). In the end, the U.S. led coalition included such countries as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, France, Canada, and the United Kingdom. There were twenty-eight nations all together (Stiles, 139).

The coming together of all of these nations proved to be a decisive victory for the coalition. The Iraqi force was demolished by the coalition. "Our strategy", General Colin Powell added, "for dealing with this army is very simple: First we are going to cut it off, then we are going to kill it" (Khadduri, 172). That is just what they did.

Over a majority of the Iraqi army was killed in the coalition's successful effort to free Kuwait. Though much of the American public including politicians and the press assumed that the war against Iraq would only be bad for the United States, liberalist's' would say that it was not. A liberalist would probably state that the Persian Gulf War was cleanly fought with much success on the coalition side. There were protesters of all sorts with signs and posters that read, "blood for oil", but this also was not true, according to the U.S. and its liberalist supporters. Some political leaders warned that the war would produce high casualties, body bags by the thousands, and may be another Vietnam-style battle, where the U.S. lost many lives. Others said that the Gulf War would cost America millions or maybe even billions of dollars to support and that it would be a long hard battle.

The Gulf War followed more or less on George Bush's schedule and it was not lengthy at all, from a liberalist's point of view. Early results of the coalition soldiers were cheered on by the people of Kuwait, stressing the results achieved with low casualties because of superior weapon systems, training, and leadership. The Coalition attained all of its political and military objectives on schedule, and with remarkably few casualties on its side, thanks to skillful and adept use of available forces. Coalition weapons mostly performed as intended and in a few cases better than expected (Bin, 210). One of the biggest reasons for a quick decisive coalition victory was because of the aerial attacks on the Iraqi soldiers. The U.S. Air Force stated, "airpower found, fixed, fought, and finished the Iraqi military" (Carpenter, 24).

There were a total of 41,309 flown missions in which the coalition bombed various targets of the Iraqi military. There were 22,790 bombs dropped on Iraq's ground for alone. There were 3,968 dropped of airfields and radars and 1,943 dropped on military industries. There were 1,459 bombs aimed at Iraq's SCUD missiles and another 1,168 dropped on roads and railroads to hinder Iraq's movements. The U.S. contributed 85% of the flown missions, Saudi Arabia 6%, the UK 5%, France 2%, other Arab countries 1%, Canada 1%, and Italy 0.2% (Bin, 235). Another way that the advancement of technology helped the coalition forces to eliminate civilian casualties was through the use of precision-guided bombs and laser guided weapons.

These two weapons helped the U.S. and the coalition to focus their bombs on specific targets instead of trying to depend on human calculations. According to one author, "U.S. forces dropped some 9,000 precision-guided bombs. Thus some 100 planes delivered the bulk of the laser guided weapons that proved so devastatingly accurate" (Bin, 235). These weapons helped to prevent civilian casualties.

These are a few of the areas that liberalist's would look at and want more attention to be focused on rather than all of the killing, especially of innocent lives. Conclusion When looking at and studying the Persian Gulf War, there are a lot of actions, in my opinion, that could only be described or viewed accurately by only one theory and that theory is realism. Realism views this war for what it really is. Instead of only viewing or discussing its positives, realism gives you a total look at the war, with the negatives included.

This war from the start was based on the conquest of oil interests by both the United States and Iraq and realism is the only theory that captures the plans of these two states.

Bibliography

Page Bin, Alberto. Desert Storm. (1998).
Westport, CT: Praeger Publisher. Carpenter, Ted. American Entangled. (1991).
Washington, D.C. : Cato Institute. Chomsky, Noam. (1991 March).
A Consistent Response to Aggression, 55, 3. Genest, Marc. Conflict And Cooperation. (2004).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc. Grossman, Mark. Encyclopedia of The Persian Gulf War. (1995).
Santa Barbara, CA: ABC- CLIO, Inc. Khadduri, Majid. War In The Gulf. (1997).
New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. Lopez, George A. (1991, September).
The Gulf War: Not So Clean. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 47, 30. Laurent, Eric. (1991).
Secret Dossier. New York: Penguin Group. Stiles, Kendall. Case Histories In International Politics. (2004).
Chicago: Pearson, Inc. Suter, David. (1991 March).
The War Some Wanted. Progressive, 55, 3. Taylor, Philip. War And The Media. (1992).