US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later

US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later
1 / 5
Soldiers of the Hashd Al Shaabi (Popular Mobilisation Units), mobilized by the Iraqi government to fight Daesh militants, are now considered to be under the influence of Iran. (AFP file photo)
US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later
2 / 5
US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later
3 / 5
An Iraqi man celebrates atop of a burning US Army Humvee in the northern part of Baghdad on April 26, 2004. (AP File)
Iraqi soldiers are seen running away on the banks of the Tigris river as US tanks roll into Baghdad, outside Saddam Hussein's presidential palace, on April 7, 2003. (AP)
4 / 5
In this June 1, 2003 photo, an Iraqi woman looks inside plastic bags containing personal belongings for clues to identify her missing son at a mass grave in Mahawil, south of Baghdad, where some 5,000 of Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims were found. (Reuters file)Iraqi soldiers are seen running away on the banks of the Tigris river as US tanks roll into Baghdad, outside Saddam Hussein's presidential palace, on April 7, 2003. (AP)
US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later
5 / 5
Iraqis fleeing violence walk down a road in the city of Ramadi on May 15, 2015 as Daesh overrun most of the western provincial capital. (Reuters file)
Short Url
Updated 17 March 2023

US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later

US grapples with forces unleashed by Iraq invasion 20 years later
  • The end of Saddam’s minority Sunni rule and replacement with a Shiite majority government in Iraq freed Iran to deepen its influence across the Levant
  • US credibility suffered from Bush’s decision to invade based on erroneous intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction

WASHINGTON: From an empowered Iran and eroded US influence to the cost of keeping US troops in Iraq and Syria to combat Islamic State fighters, the United States still contends with the consequences of invading Iraq 20 years ago, current and former officials say.
Then-US President George W. Bush’s 2003 decision to oust Saddam Hussein by force, the way limited US troop numbers enabled ethnic strife and the eventual 2011 US pullout have all greatly complicated US policy in the Middle East, they said.
The end of Saddam’s minority Sunni rule and replacement with a Shiite majority government in Iraq freed Iran to deepen its influence across the Levant, especially in Syria, where Iranian forces and Shiite militias helped Bashar Assad crush a Sunni uprising and stay in power.




Saddam Hussein listens as the prosecution makes its closing arguments at the trial of the former Iraqi dictator and seven members of his regime in Baghdad on June 19, 2006. (Reuters)

The 2011 withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq left a vacuum that Daesh (ISIS) militants filled, seizing roughly a third of Iraq and Syria and fanning fears among Gulf Arab states that they could not rely on the United States.
Having withdrawn, former US President Barack Obama in 2014 sent troops back to Iraq, where about 2,500 remain, and in 2015 he deployed to Syria, where about 900 troops are on the ground. US forces in both countries combat Daesh militants, who are also active from North Africa to Afghanistan.
“Our inability, unwillingness, to put the hammer down in terms of security in the country allowed chaos to ensue, which gave rise to Daesh,” said former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, faulting the US failure to secure Iraq.
Armitage, who served under Republican Bush when the United States invaded Iraq, said the US invasion “might be as big a strategic error” as Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941, which helped bring about Germany’s World War Two defeat.

Massive costs
The costs of US involvement in Iraq and Syria are massive.
According to estimates published this week by the “Costs of War” project at Brown University, the US price tag to date for the wars in Iraq and Syria comes to $1.79 trillion, including Pentagon and State Department spending, veterans’ care and the interest on debt financing the conflicts. Including projected veterans’ care through 2050, this rises to $2.89 trillion.




US Marines pray over a fallen comrade at a first aid point after he died from wounds suffered in fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, on April 8, 2004. (AP file)

The project puts US military deaths in Iraq and Syria over the past 20 years at 4,599 and estimates total deaths, including Iraqi and Syrian civilians, military, police, opposition fighters, media and others at 550,000 to 584,000. This includes only those killed as a direct result of war but not estimated indirect deaths from disease, displacement or starvation.
US credibility also suffered from Bush’s decision to invade based on bogus, exaggerated and ultimately erroneous intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
John Bolton, a war advocate who served under Bush, said even though Washington made mistakes — by failing to deploy enough troops and administering Iraq instead of quickly handing over to Iraqis — he believed removing Saddam justified the costs.

HIGHLIGHTS

Invasion led to diminished US influence in Mideast

Toppling of Saddam emboldened Iran, unnerved Gulf Arabs

Limit on US troop numbers enabled communal strife

Daesh (ISIS) filled vacuum left by 2011 US pullout

’Strategic error’ akin to Hitler’s Russia invasion — Armitage

US price tag for wars in Iraq, Syria $1.79 trillion

550,000-584,000 deaths in both countries, including 4,599 US military

“It was worth it because the decision was not simply: ‘Does Saddam pose a WMD threat in 2003?’” he said. “Another question was: ‘Would he pose a WMD threat five years later?’ To which I think the answer clearly was ‘yes.’“
“The worst mistake made after the overthrow of Saddam ... was withdrawing in 2011,” he added, saying he believed Obama wanted to pull out and used the inability to get guarantees of immunity for US forces from Iraq’s parliament “as an excuse.”

’Alarm bells ringing ... in the Gulf’
Ryan Crocker, who served as US ambassador in Iraq, said the 2003 invasion did not immediately undermine US influence in the Gulf but the 2011 withdrawal helped push Arab states to start hedging their bets.
In the latest example of waning US influence, Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed on Friday to re-establish relations after years of hostility in a deal brokered by China.
“We just decided we didn’t want to do this stuff anymore,” Crocker said, referring to the US unwillingness to keep spending blood and treasure securing Iraq. “That began ... with President Obama declaring ... he was going to pull all forces out.”
“These were US decisions not forced by a collapsing economy, not forced by demonstrators in the street,” he said. “Our leadership just decided we didn’t want to do it any more. And that started the alarm bells ringing ... in the Gulf.”
Jim Steinberg, a deputy secretary of state under Obama, said the war raised deep questions about Washington’s willingness to act unilaterally and its steadfastness as a partner.
“The net result ... has been bad for US leverage, bad for US influence, bad for our ability to partner with countries in the region,” he said.
A debate still rages among former officials over Obama’s decision to withdraw, tracking a timeline laid out by the Bush administration and reflecting a US inability to secure immunities for US troops backed by the Iraqi parliament.
Bolton’s belief that removing Saddam was worth the eventual cost is not held by many current and former officials.
Asked the first word that came to mind about the invasion and its aftermath, Armitage replied “FUBAR,” a military acronym which, politely, stands for “Fouled up beyond all recognition.”
“Disaster,” said Larry Wilkerson, former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s chief of staff.
“Unnecessary,” said Steinberg.


Italy pledges cash to support Tunisia amid uncertainty

Italy pledges cash to support Tunisia amid uncertainty
Updated 21 March 2023

Italy pledges cash to support Tunisia amid uncertainty

Italy pledges cash to support Tunisia amid uncertainty
  • Rome pushing IMF to bail out Tunisia amid concerns over energy, migration
  • Italian government ‘in constant contact’ with Tunisian President Kais Saied

London: Italy will invest €110 million ($118.4 million) in Tunisia in a bid to shore up stability in the North African country, its foreign minister announced.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Council in Brussels, Antonio Tajani said the money would be transferred via the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation and that he hoped further funding would be approved by the International Monetary Fund.

Italy has been pushing the IMF to unblock a $1.9 billion loan to Tunisia over fears that it could be destabilized without financial assistance, with significant consequences for Italy’s energy supplies and the flow of migration to Europe.

“We are in constant contact with the Tunisian government,” Tajani said. “I hope that the IMF will reach an agreement with the Tunisian President Kais Saied to ensure stability.”

International opposition to bailing out Tunisia centers around fears that Saied, who has drawn ire over constitutional changes, crackdowns on political opponents and his recent rhetoric about sub-Saharan migrants in his country, cannot be trusted to agree to significant reforms, let alone enforce them.

“It is important that reforms are made because funding is linked to reforms, and to prevent (Islamist) terrorism from appearing in North Africa,” Tajani said. “The fundamental problem is that of stability in North Africa and Tunisia.”

Tunisia is vital to Italy’s energy security, as part of the route of the Trans-Mediterranean Pipeline, which delivers gas to Italy and Central Europe from Algeria.

In 2022, the EU granted €300 million for the construction of an €850 million electricity interconnector project, ELMED, to link Italy to Tunisia’s growing solar farm industry.

Tunisia is also the staging post for significant numbers of migrants attempting to reach Europe via the Italian peninsula from North Africa.

Saied recently prompted a surge in sub-Saharan migrants leaving his country for Europe after accusing them of changing “the demographic composition” of Tunisia and alleging they were responsible for an uptick in crime.

This in turn has resulted in numerous people suffering violence or facing eviction and deciding to cross the Mediterranean.

Data from the Italian Ministry of the Interior indicates that crossings from Tunisia to Italy are up 788 percent from the same period last year, with 12,083 people landing on Italian shores from Jan. 1 to March 13 — a third of the total number who made the trip in 2022.

Laurence Hart, director of the International Organization for Migration’s Mediterranean coordination office, told Italian outlet Agenzia Nova that migrants who would once have found work in Tunisia were being lured to Europe by the country’s growing instability and hostility and by the promises of people-traffickers.

“Migrants leaving Tunisia come from very specific countries, which, looking at the statistics…are the Ivory Coast and Guinea. These are countries with which Tunisia has an agreement on visa-free arrivals,” he said. 

“On the one hand, this stimulates regular migration, because many sub-Saharan (Africans) are regularly employed in the various sectors of the Tunisian economy. On the other, it obviously leaves room for many intermediaries who play on the lack of information or on distorted information for their own personal gain.”


UAE president pardons more than 1,000 inmates ahead of Ramadan

UAE president pardons more than 1,000 inmates ahead of Ramadan
Updated 21 March 2023

UAE president pardons more than 1,000 inmates ahead of Ramadan

UAE president pardons more than 1,000 inmates ahead of Ramadan

ABU DHABI: UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan has ordered the release of 1,025 prisoners serving various sentences in the UAE, ahead of Ramadan, state news agency WAM reported.

Sheikh Mohamed’s annual pardon ahead of Ramadan aims to “enhance family cohesion”, the report explained, adding that it created a happier environment for the wives and children of those released as well as enabling them to pursue successful social and professional lives in the future.

Anatomy of a disaster
Two decades later, Iraqis are still paying the price for Bush's ill-judged war
Enter
keywords

Related


Israel repeals law that banned four West Bank settlements

Israel repeals law that banned four West Bank settlements
Updated 21 March 2023

Israel repeals law that banned four West Bank settlements

Israel repeals law that banned four West Bank settlements
  • The original law, passed in 2005, mandated the evacuation of four Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank along with Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip

JERUSALEM: Israeli parliament on Tuesday repealed legislation that ordered the evacuation of four settlements in the occupied West Bank, one of the first major moves by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hard-right coalition.
The original law, passed in 2005, mandated the evacuation of four Jewish settlements in the northern West Bank along with Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip. The repeal would allow Jewish residents to return to these settlements on condition of approval by the Israeli military.
Since the 1967 war, Israel has established around 140 settlements on land Palestinians see as the core of a future state. Besides the authorized settlements, groups of settlers have built scores of outposts without government permission.
Most world powers deem settlements built in the territory Israel seized in the 1967 war as illegal under international law and their expansion as an obstacle to peace, since they eat away at land the Palestinians claim for a future state.
Yuli Edelstein, head of the Israeli parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, hailed the move as “the first and significant step toward real repair and the establishment of Israel in the territories of the homeland that belongs to it.”

Anatomy of a disaster
Two decades later, Iraqis are still paying the price for Bush's ill-judged war
Enter
keywords

Jordan says Israel disavows behavior of top minister over flag of expanded borders

Jordan says Israel disavows behavior of top minister over flag of expanded borders
Updated 21 March 2023

Jordan says Israel disavows behavior of top minister over flag of expanded borders

Jordan says Israel disavows behavior of top minister over flag of expanded borders
  • Inciteful rhetoric: The UAE also condemned finance minister Bezalel Smotrich’s statements

Jordan said it has received assurance from Israel that the behavior of a top cabinet minister, who spoke at a podium adorned with an Israeli flag that appeared to include Jordan, did not represent their position, an official source said on Tuesday.

The source told Reuters that top Israeli officials rejected Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s move during a speech on Monday, and said that they respected Jordan’s borders and Israel’s peace treaty with Jordan. Smotrich heads a religious-nationalist party in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s hard-right coalition.

The UAE on Tuesday condemned the finance minister’s statements as well as his use of a map of Israel that includes lands from Jordan and the occupied Palestinian territories.

In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation affirmed the UAE’s rejection of inciteful rhetoric and all practices that contradict moral and human values and principles, state news agency WAM reported.

The ministry stressed the need to confront hate speech and violence and noted the importance of promoting the values of tolerance and coexistence to reduce escalation and instability in the region, the report added.

The Arab League also condemned the Israeli minister's statements. The Assistant Secretary-General for Palestine to the Arab League, Saeed Abu Ali, said in a statement these statements by Smotrich represent a racist and colonial stance, and considered the statements a blatant threat to peace and security in the region.
The Assistant Secretary-General of the Arab League stressed the need to be alert to the seriousness of these Israeli policies and the importance of confronting them with firm international stances and measures in support of the rights of the Palestinian people.
Amman late on Monday summoned the Israeli ambassador in Jordan and said Smotrich’s move was a provocative act by an “extremist” and “racist” minister that violated international norms and Jordan’s peace treaty with Israel.

“These statements are provocative, racist and come from an extremist figure and we call on the international community to condemn it,” Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said at a news conference.

Safadi received a call from Israel’s national security adviser, assuring him that Israel — which shares the longest border with its neighbor to the West of the Jordan River — respected the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country, the source said.

Smotrich made the speech as Israeli and Palestinian officials met in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh for de-escalation talks ahead of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and the Jewish Passover holiday.


Arab League chief, Russian deputy FM discuss regional issues, Ukraine war

Arab League chief, Russian deputy FM discuss regional issues, Ukraine war
Updated 21 March 2023

Arab League chief, Russian deputy FM discuss regional issues, Ukraine war

Arab League chief, Russian deputy FM discuss regional issues, Ukraine war

CAIRO: Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit on Sunday expressed his concerns at mounting violence in the occupied Palestinian territories.

His comments regarding Israeli government actions came during a meeting in Cairo with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov.

Their discussions also centered around other regional issues and Arab-Russian relations.

Aboul Gheit’s spokesman, Jamal Rushdi, said Bogdanov outlined Moscow’s stance on Syria, Yemen, Libya, and the economic and presidential vacancy crises in Lebanon. Iranian and Turkish policies toward the Arab region were also discussed.

Separately, during his assessment of an Arab strategic report by the Egyptian Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Aboul Gheit said the conflict in Ukraine and rivalries between the US and China were among the most alarming issues since the end of World War II.

“The Arabs are cautious in dealing with the Ukrainian crisis and its effects.

“All of this does not miss China, which is building a large naval power capable of competing with America in the Pacific Ocean and perhaps the world,” he added.