Iraq-1: The Costs of War
[An excerpt from Chaco Canyon]
A man in the first row arose and said: "Professor Donaldson, maybe I missed something during your talk, but there seemed to be quite a few points made by you which sounded like you were trying to blame the United States for the Gulf War. If memory serves me well, we were not the ones who invaded Kuwait. I'm wondering if you would elaborate on some of your views in this regard."
"Dr. Clarke," she began, "I believe the term I used with respect to the moral responsibilities of the United States in the Gulf War was ‘complicity’. In fact, the idea of complicity could be applied with varying degrees of relevancy to all of the participants of that war.
"Let's be clear about something right up front. And, please, Dr. Clarke, bear with me a little on this.
"Somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 Iraqi civilians died as a result of Coalition bombing of targets in Iraq. Since the end of the 43-day Gulf War in 1991, there have been hundreds of thousands of further deaths of Iraqi children.
"Many of these children have died from a variety of infectious diseases which have been epidemic in Iraq since the cessation of bombing. These diseases have arisen because of the unsanitary living conditions that have been created by the Allies destruction of sewage systems, potable drinking water facilities, pumping stations and power-generating capabilities.
"Malnutrition also has been a very important contributing factor in many of these post-war deaths. Due to a variety of reasons, including our continued application of sanctions against Iraq, food there is both scarce and very expensive. Many Iraqis are poor or unemployed or both and cannot afford the simple necessities of life."
She paused slightly and stared at the wall to her right, as if there were information there to be read off. When she found what she was looking for, she turned back to the audience.
"When the US encouraged and promoted an uprising in southern Iraq following Desert Storm and, then, abandoned those people to Iraq's still largely intact Republican Guard, a further 6,000 or more people died. In addition, there were another 2,000 Kurds who were killed in an uprising, again encouraged and abandoned by the Allies, which occurred at the same time as the uprising in the south.
"Furthermore, although the actual number of Iraqi military casualties probably will never be known because of the bulldozing tactics employed by the Allies, informed estimates indicate that anywhere from 75,000 to 110,000 Iraqi soldiers died during the war. There are further estimates of some 300,000 seriously wounded Iraqi soldiers who undoubtedly overburdened an already overtaxed and under supplied Iraqi medical system.
"We need to add to the foregoing, the 144 Americans who died during Desert Storm, as well as the roughly 300 Kuwait citizens who lost their lives. And, we must not forget the two Israelis and 8 Palestinians who died in Israel and the occupied territories."
Professor Donaldson began pacing, slowly back and forth, along a six foot strip of the raised platform from which she delivering her ideas. She spoke as she paced.
"In addition, let us consider the large scale displacement of people which went on just before, during, and just after the 43 days of war. For instance, about 400,000 people, mostly Egyptians, fled Iraq prior to the bombing. Another 1.5 million refugees left Kuwait, many of whom were foreign nationals working in Kuwait who, as a result of the displacement, lost jobs, homes, possessions and their savings.
"The Saudis deported about 700,000 Yemeni residents from Saudi Arabia simply because the Yemen government was not in favor of the Coalition's War Plan. In addition, the Kuwaitis forcibly, and with considerable abuse, deported some 150,000 Palestinians from Kuwait after the war.
"This forced exodus came as a result of two major reasons. On the one hand, the Kuwaiti leaders objected to the way many Palestinians, both inside and outside Kuwait, were pleased with the Iraqi attempt, before the onset of Desert Storm, to link the solution of the Palestinian problem to a negotiated withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait.
"Since the Kuwaitis had been among the biggest financial benefactors of the PLO prior to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the Kuwaitis interpreted the Palestinian support of the linkage issue with a betrayal of, and ingratitude toward, Kuwait. Apparently, the Kuwaitis were prepared to help the Palestinians with a few dollars, but the Kuwaitis just were not interested in making the sort of sacrifices which would help solve the problem once and for all.
"The other reason for the forced exodus of Palestinians from Kuwait revolved around the fact that some Palestinians apparently collaborated with the Iraqis during the latter's occupation of Kuwait. However, there was no serious effort to determine who exactly was involved in these acts of collaboration. Furthermore, there was little, if any, remorse on the part of the Kuwaiti leaders for the repeated violation of human rights which accompanied the forcible expulsion of the Palestinians from Kuwait.
"Between March and April of 1991, there was a further displacement of roughly 2.5 million people. Most of these displaced people were Kurds from the North who, as a result of the forced migration, were reduced to living in sub-subsistence conditions along the borders of Iraq, Turkey and Iran."
Dr. Donaldson stopped pacing. She removed her glasses from her face with her right hand and began massaging her eyes with the thumb and first two fingers of her left hand. After a few seconds, she put her glasses back on.
"Finally," she said, "let us consider the tremendous environmental damage which has ensued from the Gulf War. To begin with, there are the obvious ramifications which come from the burning of oil tankers and terminals.
"The delicate marine ecology of the Gulf area has been seriously compromised. Phytoplankton, algae and sea grasses which are fundamental parts of the food chain have been affected. Consequently, the shrimp, fish and other aquatic forms of life that depend on these biological species for their continued existence are also threatened.
"While the oil fires were raging, calculations indicated that more than 100,000 tons of soot particles and some 50 tons of sulphur dioxide were being released into the atmosphere on a daily basis. Some of the projections for the dispersal distances of these chemicals suggest that 2000 kilometers or more is quite likely.
"These substances play a central role in the formation of acid rain. And, shortly after the war, there were reports from Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, and Russia concerning the destructive effects of these pollutants in their countries. Ground water, soil, and life forms are all being affected.
"Coalition bombing destroyed four nuclear research facilities and two nuclear reactors. Estimates indicate there may have been 200-300 kilograms of radioactive waste materials, such as plutonium, strontium, cesium and iodine, being stored at these sites.
"Coalition military experts claim these facilities were bombed in such a way that there was no possibility of contamination or leakage being generated. However, given the general tenor of fabrications, disinformation and misleading statements concerning the effectiveness and accuracy of the so-called ‘smart bombs’ and given the fact that the military authorities are quite vague as to how their bombing techniques could guarantee there would be no contamination from, or leakage of, radioactive materials at the various nuclear sites, one has to take the assurances of the military experts with more than a grain of salt."
Dr. Donaldson was about to say something but checked herself, as if a further, relevant idea or piece of information suddenly had occurred to her. Her face brightened with the enthusiasm of someone who was intrigued with different facets of the topic being discussed, despite the depressing nature of the realities being explored.
"Incidentally, you may be interested to learn that in November-1990, several months before Desert Storm began in earnest, the International Atomic Energy Agency had inspected the nuclear research facilities in Iraq, including their Tammura-2 and IRT-5000 reactors. The Agency's investigation determined that the Iraqi nuclear facilities and reactors were being employed for peaceful research purposes.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency is the organization authorized by the United Nations to force compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Consequently, the Agency has the task of ensuring that all nuclear research facilities and affiliated reactors are being used for exclusively peaceful purposes.
"In 1985, six years prior to Desert Storm, the IAEA passed a resolution which stipulated clearly that any armed attack on a nuclear facility being used for peaceful purposes was a violation of the Agency's statutes, as well as both International Law and the Charter of the United Nations Charter.
"This statute of the IAEA arose partly as a result of the Israeli bombing of the Iraqi Osirak reactor facility in 1981. There were, however, other factors which shaped their statute, and, presumably one of these additional factors was to avoid situations where radioactive waste materials from peaceful facilities would be leaked, entirely unnecessarily, into the environment to cause serious contamination.
"Thus, the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear facilities represents an interesting paradox. On the one hand, we have the New World Order which was supposedly the moral authority for waging the Gulf war.
"The New World Order allegedly was predicated on principles of peace, justice and respect for international law. Yet, in order to impose the New World Order, all three of its principles had to be violated in fundamental ways.
"Certainly, these violations were evident in the Coalition bombing of the Iraqi nuclear facilities, and there are many other aspects of the Gulf War which are further examples of such violations. These are precedents which do not augur well for the future."
Professor Donaldson ran both her hands through her hair several times. She tucked some of her relatively short cropped hair behind her ears, getting set for the next part of her talk.
"Last, but not least, on the ecological hit parade is the issue of the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons which were among the primary targets of the Coalition forces. The Iraqi facilities at, among other places, Samarra, Kamisiyah, Bayji, and Salman Pak were well-known to the military leaders of the Coalition forces.
"Those in command knew precisely what was being produced or stored or researched at each of the Iraqi facilities. Moreover, they did not come to this knowledge overnight. It had been with them for quite some time.
"There is something terribly ironic in this whole issue of chemical and biological weapons. The Coalition forces were extremely concerned about the possibility of the Iraqis releasing chemical and biological agents. In fact, the Coalition leaders were so worried about this contingency, they informed the Iraqis that Baghdad would be hit with nuclear strikes if any chemical or biological weapons were used by the Iraqis.
"So what did these deep thinkers of the Coalition go and do? Why they went and released these toxic agents into the air, ground water and soil through their destruction of the Iraqi chemical and biological research, production and storage facilities."
As she said "deep thinkers", there was a derisive tone to the words. Her body language matched the tone of voice. Both conveyed a sense of not quite being able to comprehend how someone could act in a way that would bring to realization the very purpose one was allegedly committed to preventing.
"There is a growing body of evidence," she said, "which indicates that tens of thousands of American participants in the Gulf War are suffering from something called ‘The Gulf War Syndrome’. This Syndrome exhibits a wide variety of debilitating neurological and physiological symptoms, along with a disturbingly high incidence of birth defects among their post-war children.
"The American authorities are denying the existence of any such disease. Yet, for more than twenty years these same authorities denied any culpability in the tragedy of the thousands of Vietnam veterans who had been exposed to, and suffered from, the toxic effects of Agent Orange which had been used extensively in Vietnam.
"The Gulf War Syndrome may be, in part, a function of the contamination resulting from the more than 25 Iraqi storage, production and research facilities destroyed by Coalition bombing. Or, the Gulf War syndrome might be the result of some of the experimental drugs being foisted on the Coalition forces as alleged protection against the possible release of Iraqi chemical and biological agents.
"Possibly, the Gulf War Syndrome is a function of being exposed to the depleted uranium used in the heavy artillery shells of Coalition forces. On the other hand, the Gulf War Syndrome may have something to do with breathing in all the toxic substances which were released by the burning oil tankers and terminals.
"The Gulf War Syndrome also may be a combination of all of the foregoing factors coming together in a destructive synergy. Sorting it all out may not be an easy puzzle to solve.
"The problem is, nobody with any power bothered to think it all through, before the fact of implementing Desert Storm. Apparently, nobody stopped to consider the possibility that the actions of the Coalition leaders and forces could generate something like the Gulf War Syndrome or the other destructive aspects of the war.
A mood of frustration, sorrow and anger seemed to descend on Professor Donaldson. She shook her head a few times before proceeding.
"The Coalition leaders were too preoccupied with their power and technological wizardry. Their moral arrogance, ignorance, carelessness, heedlessness, biases, presumptions, and hatreds would not permit them to consider the possibilities which were staring them in the face.
"Apparently, nobody sat down and said: ‘we are about to kill hundreds of thousands of people, more than half of whom are innocent civilians, including hundreds of thousands of children. Is there some way in which this can be avoided?’
"Seemingly, nobody sat down and reflected: ‘We are about to create about 5 million refugees, forcing many, if not most of them, into extremely marginal and tenuous subsistence conditions. Is there something we could do to avoid disrupting the lives of millions of innocent bystanders?’
"Presumably, nobody sat down and had the insight to realize we are about to set in motion forces which will substantially degrade the ecological viability of thousands of cubic miles of air, water, land and life forms. Is there any alternative plan which would permit us to avoid this?
"Unfortunately, nobody seems to have sat down and realized: we are about to unnecessarily expose tens of thousands of American soldiers and their unborn children, as well as thousands of Iraqis and others, to toxic chemical, biological and radioactive agents. These agents will debilitate, deform and kill them. Can we find some solution to the problem which would avoid such a tragedy?
She turned and looked directly at Dr. Clarke. The words which followed were directed toward him, but the arguments conveyed by those words were directed toward the thinking of the leaders of the Coalition, along with the thinking of those who supported the perspective she was critiquing.
"Dr. Clarke, the power of life, death and destruction was entirely in the discretionary hands of the Coalition forces and their political leaders. It was their decision to unleash those forces. They could have refrained from doing so, but they didn't.
"From the very moment that Iraq invaded Kuwait, there were a large number of efforts of negotiation and diplomacy on the part of Jordan, the PLO, Algeria, France, and, even, Iraq to find a peaceful solution to the invasion. From the beginning, Kuwait and the United States were impervious to all of these overtures.
"Hundreds of thousands of people lost their lives. Hundreds of thousands more people were wounded. Millions of lives were displaced. Incalculable damage was done to the environment. Billions of dollars which could have been used to solve the crisis in a peaceful and just manner were wasted on war."
In a dramatic gesture, Dr. Donaldson flung her arms out to her sides. Her whole body looked like it was posing a question.
"And, why did this all come about?" she asked, as her voice gave expression to what her body already was asking. Responding to her own question, she said:"
All the destruction, death and horror came about as a result of unresolved disputes over: (a) two islands by the name of Warba and Bubiyan which would have provided the Iraqis with access to the sea; (b) several miles of border clarification involving the Rumaila oil field, and (c) 10 billion dollars of debt incurred by Iraq from Kuwait while the former was, among other things, effectively serving and protecting western interests, especially those of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, during the Iran-Iraq, eight year war."
The tone of her voice became both incensed as well as imploring. "Wouldn't it have been quicker, cheaper, more peaceful, more effective, less destructive, and, therefore, ultimately, more just to say to the Iraqis: ‘Here, take the islands, forget about the debt, and we'll readjust the border of the Rumaila oil field in a way that will be largely in your favor?’ Wouldn't this have been something of a bargain when compared to the actual costs of death, destruction, disease, displacement, debt and ecological degradation which resulted from the war?"
Dr. Donaldson left her questions to hang suspended above the hearts of her audience, hoping they would act like a moral counterpart to the sword of Damocles. She quickly surveyed the audience, scratched her head, smoothed her hair in the spot just scratched, and shrugged.
"Perhaps, some of you may be thinking: how naive and impractical. Why give up two islands, an oil field and 10 billion dollars to a murdering dictator?
"Such people, I believe, are working on the assumption that property, possessions and money are more important than ecology, people and sharing. We all are far too preoccupied with trying to figure out how to kick people off the life raft of existence than we are concerned with finding ways to make room so that more people can be given safety on that raft.
"Suggestions which propose a sharing of resources and land among all the people of Earth are not what is impractical and naive. What is impractical and naive is the belief that we are ever going to solve our problems through greed, selfishness and hostility."
Professor Donaldson sighed slightly. She scanned the audience again. This time her sweep was slower, almost geared to make personal contact with different individuals in the audience.
Eventually, she spoke again. "And, for those of you in the audience who feel all of the foregoing is 20-20 hindsight, there is one simple question I have for you. If we didn't know the extent of the death and destruction which we were going to cause in the Gulf War, then, why did we go ahead and act in ignorance without careful consideration of the terrible consequences of our actions?"
Almost as soon as she had raised her question, she began shaking her head in a deliberate, but emphatic, manner. She stopped the movement, seemed to reflect for a few seconds and, then, shook her head in an emphatic manner a few more times.
"However, I do not believe we can escape behind a mea culpa of ignorance in relation to the ramifications of our decisions in the Gulf War. Politicians and military officials are very good at constructing computer models concerning the likely outcomes of different military strategies.
"The people who were in charge of the Coalition knew what they were doing. They knew the human, ecological, and infra structural damage which they intended to inflict. In fact, it was their precise, technical knowledge of the devastating effects of their intended actions which was the motivation shaping all of their decisions for 43 terrible days.
"Personally speaking, I find this knowing willingness to inflict almost unimaginable pain, suffering, death and destruction on both the innocent and the not-so-innocent to be far more horrifying and worrisome than any such act done out of ill-considered blindness. However, whether we did what we did with cold calculation or with blind, unthinking foolishness, we have a terrible complicity in the tragedy of the Gulf War."
Dr. Donaldson began pacing again. Her hands were behind her back, and she was looking at the floor as she paced. She appeared to be getting ready for the next part of her response to Dr. Clarke.
She stopped pacing and faced the audience again. "There is a tendency when commenting about international events to try to reduce things to a black and white, good-guy and bad-guy, scenario. As such, we say that whoever happens to be designated as the current bad-guys by the ruling powers must be the cause of everything evil in the world.
"Alternatively, we tend to consider ourselves to be innocent, pure, and, entirely blameless for the evil that the bad-guys do. More often than not, we are in deep denial about the role we play in helping to set events in motion.
"We say the Iraqis could have, and should have, refrained from invading Kuwait. They had a choice, and they were wrong in the choice which they exercised.
"Moreover, we say that once in Kuwait, the Iraqis had the ability to withdraw from Kuwait. They did not, and, therefore, once again, they made the wrong choice."
She paused and looked into the eyes of different people in the audience. She did this for, maybe, ten seconds and continued on speaking.
"The Gulf War did not arise in a vacuum. There is a history behind it.
"The lives of countries and individuals consist of a chain of events. The links of these chains are not independent of one another. They have interlocking meaning.
"Conveniently, we forget about all the ways in which we helped to support Iraq militarily and economically after its invasion of Iran over unresolved issues of access to the sea and disputed borders- issues eerily similar to those surrounding Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. We forget about how our Ambassador to Iraq told the Iraqis, just days before the invasion, that the United States has no opinion in the matter of Iraq's border disputes with Kuwait.
"We forget about how, in the years leading up to the Gulf crisis, we provided Iraq with billions of dollars in loans and credits with which they, with our knowledge, built up their military capabilities. We forget about the fact that we had precise intelligence reports concerning what Iraq was doing in its programs of research, production and storage of chemical and biological weapons, and, yet, we did nothing.
"We forget about the fact that we knew all about the oppression, murders, and human rights abuses taking place in Iraq, but, nonetheless, we became Iraq's biggest trading partner just prior to the Gulf War. We chose to look the other way about all the terrible things which were going on in Iraq because American business could make a buck.
"We forget that in our great concern for the Kurdish people and the despicable way in which they were gassed, abused and forced to live in squalid conditions by the Iraqi military, we never did anything before the Gulf War, to help the Kurds to establish a homeland or to alleviate their suffering. And, we didn't do this because it would have created tensions in our relations with Turkey and pre-revolutionary Iran , each of which was serving our interests in a variety of ways.
"We forget how the Coalition leaders were so confident of their moral position vis-a-vis Iraq that they felt compelled to call upon witnesses to lie during Congressional hearings and falsely accuse the Iraqi occupiers of having bayoneted and smashed the helpless bodies of babies in incubators in a hospital in Kuwait. This is all too reminiscent of the US government's decision to lie to the American public about the fabricated Gulf of Tonkin incident which helped convince Americans about the wisdom of becoming more deeply mired in Vietnam.
"We allow ourselves to forget that as a result of Kuwait's greed to sell more and more oil at prices which were favorable to western vested interests, Kuwait's actions were pounding further nails into the coffin of Iraq's already war-torn economy, with devastating effects on the Iraqi people. We forget that more than two weeks prior to the threatened invasion, Iraq had tried to bring its concerns to the attention of Kuwait and other members of the Arab League. Promises were made, but nothing was done.
"Conveniently, we forget that the United States had rejected all discussion of sanctions, negotiations, and diplomacy as means of resolving the Iraq-Kuwait invasion crisis. We, like Iraq, had choices, and we, like them, consistently made wrong choices."
She let her words sink in. While she did this, she slowly ran the fingers of right hand back and forth across her forehead, as if it helped her to concentrate.
Professor Donaldson discontinued the motion and began speaking: "We made the wrong choices because we helped construct the international environment out of which the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait arose. We made the wrong choices because the invasion crisis could have been solved, even before it arose, with little, or no, cost in human life and ecological damage. We made the wrong choices because the invasion crisis could have been solved, even after it arose, with a little bit of compassion, imagination, creativity, understanding and flexibility on the part of the Coalition leaders."
Each sentence that began with: "we made the wrong choice", was followed by a dramatic pause. Apparently, she was trying to give emphasis not only to what had just been said, but to what was to follow, as well.
In a matter-of-fact tone of voice, she said: "The Iraqis were wrong to do what they did. We were wrong to do what we did. Consequently, we have complicity in the terrible sequence of events which transpired in the Gulf."
She became a little bit more animated and emphatic when she said: "In fact, in my opinion, we have greater complicity in the tragedy of the Gulf War than does Iraq. The greater moral responsibility in any conflict always rests with the one who is in the position to avoid the greater evil. And, quite frankly, the damage inflicted by Iraq in invading Kuwait pales in comparison to the totally unnecessary damage inflicted by the Coalition forces in responding to the wrongs of Iraq.
"The exercise of force carries with it a fiduciary responsibility with respect to all those who may be affected by the sphere of influence of such an exercise. The Coalition leaders violated, in virtually every conceivable way, their fiduciary responsibilities with respect to their exercise of force in the Gulf crisis. It was excessive, disproportionate, indiscriminate and unnecessary, and, in many ways, totally ineffective as far as the stated goals of securing peace, justice and respect for International Law are concerned."
Professor Donaldson smiled, somewhat apologetically, both to Dr. Clarke and the rest of the audience, and said: I'm sorry for going on at such length. I hope I have satisfied your desire for an elaboration of my point of view."
Dr. Clarke stood again and said: "Thank you, very much, Professor Donaldson, for your detailed response. You've given us all, I'm sure, a great deal to ponder on.
"Of course, I don't necessarily agree with everything which you have stated in your analysis of the Gulf War situation. Some of these points of difference would, perhaps, be better left for another occasion.
"However, if I might be permitted to touch on just one such issue, I would question the validity of your belief that the Coalition had any choice in the course of action to be pursued with respect to Iraq. Surely, Dr. Jameson, if Iraq had been allowed to swallow Kuwait whole without a lesson in table manners from the Coalition, everybody in the Gulf region would have been at risk of being next on the menu.
"Moreover, the greater Gulf area contains something like 60-70% of the known, world oil reserves. The civilized world simply could not afford to have a brutal and, quite possibly, psychopathic thug be in control of such resources, wouldn't you agree Professor?"
Dr. Jameson was thoughtful for about 15 seconds and, then, started to speak. "I would agree with you, Dr. Clarke, that the Iraqi people are oppressed by a brutal dictator who depends on violence in a fashion similar to the way an alcoholic depends on booze. I'm not sure I would agree with you on much of anything else you have said."
Before launching into her reply, Professor Donaldson was quiet for about twenty seconds. She looked at some of the walls of the room as well as the room's floor. Her eyes were traveling about the room, but her attention appeared to be focused on something within her.
She pulled out of her brief, reflective mode and started with: "Both during the time leading up to the Gulf War, as well in its aftermath, lots of analysts seemed to assume, almost automatically, that Iraq had nothing but grandiose delusions of grandeur driving it. These commentators all jumped on the bandwagon of a popular theory going around at the time which claimed that Iraq's intentions were to absorb all of the Gulf region into the greater glory of an expanding Iraqi empire which, subsequently, would proceed to bring the hated West to its knees.
"I'm not sure the evidence necessarily supports such a view. First of all, look at the parallels between the conditions which started the Iran-Iraq War and the circumstances that initiated the Gulf War. I alluded to these parallels earlier.
"In both Gulf wars Iraq invaded another country for very similar reasons. In each instance, Iraq desperately wanted access to the sea in order to supplement, if not replace, the more costly and cumbersome piping of oil through Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Moreover, in the circumstances leading up to both Gulf wars, there was a dispute over boundaries which carried significant economic ramifications for Iraq: the Shatt al-Arab boundary in the case of Iran and the Rumeila oilfield in the case of Kuwait.
"In both the Iran-Iraq War and the second Gulf war, Iraq was extremely upset with the problems which the country being invaded was creating for Iraq. In the first Gulf War, Iraq was angry with the social and political difficulties which the Iranian Revolution was stirring up among the Shi'a majority of Iraq.
"In the second Gulf War, Iraq was angry at Kuwait for playing havoc with the Iraqi economy, which had been run into the ground as a result of the Iran-Iraq War. Kuwait was dumping quantities of oil onto the world markets far in excess of the agreed-upon quotas and, as a result, driving down the price of oil at a time when Iraq needed money to rebuild its economy and country.
"In addition, Iraq felt Kuwait was not only trying to wage economic war against Iraq but that Kuwait seemed to have a very short memory, and little sense of gratitude, concerning the sacrifices which Iraq had made during the Iran-Iraq War. These sacrifices of Iraqi life, property and economy had considerable direct benefits for Kuwait and the whole Gulf region."
Having laid the foundations for what was to follow, Professor Donaldson gave the audience a short mental break, before developing her position further. When the mini-break ended, she asked a series of questions.
"If Iraq had a mind-set focused on conquering Kuwait, why did it bother to stop at the border for a number of days in order to give Kuwait an opportunity to reconsider its intransigence? Why was Iraq open to the negotiating efforts of a number of Arab intermediaries? Why was Iraq willing to attend a mini-summit in Jeddah in order to discuss the matter?
"If I were a brutal dictator with imperialistic designs on conquering the whole Middle East, I wouldn't think twice about running roughshod over whatever stood in my way. I certainly wouldn't hang around a disputed border region and give my intended prey, or anyone else, an opportunity to prevent, or interfere with, my plans to seize my intended targets."
She shifted gears and steered in a slightly different, but related, direction. "A number of people have suggested that Iraq was trying to extort or blackmail Kuwait into concessions. As such, the show of force along the border was intended to intimidate Kuwait and elicit the desired response from them.
"If the foregoing is the case, then the intention of Iraq would not appear to be one of conquering Kuwait and, subsequently, the rest of the Middle East. Rather, Iraq had a specific purpose: namely, to gain access to the sea; to have a favorable settlement to the boundary dispute issue; and, thirdly, to get Kuwait to either forgive Iraq's war debt or to stop driving the price of oil down or both.
"In other words, the available evidence suggests Iraq may have been playing the situation straight up, although rather brutally. Iraq was not merely going through the motions of massing on the Kuwait border. If Kuwait refused to deal with Iraq in a way in which Iraq felt was fair under the circumstances, then Iraq, by force, would take steps to convince Kuwait of the desperateness and urgency of Iraq's economic problems.
"In short, Iraq was not bluffing. It was fed up with the situation. Iraq was fully prepared to take action immediately if Kuwait did not respond with what Iraq considered to be signs of good faith concerning Iraq's specific complaints against Kuwait.
"I believe the evidence which has been cited previously is quite consistent with my somewhat less sinister interpretation of Iraqi intentions and actions in relation to Kuwait. But, let's explore a few other possibilities."
She spent a short time collecting and organizing her thoughts. When she was ready, she began exploring some of the possibilities to which she had alluded.
"If I were a brutal dictator with aspirations to conquer other countries in the Middle East, and if I had several hundred thousand troops at my disposal, half of which were stationed along the Saudi border, then, after having secured Kuwait, I wouldn't have hesitated to move into Saudi Arabia and conquer it, while the opportunity presented itself, especially since there would not have been anyone available to stop me.
"If I'm willing to run the risk of invoking the wrath of the world for my invasion of Kuwait, then, do I have anything more to lose, as far as world condemnation is concerned, by adding Saudi Arabia to my list? ‘In for a penny, in for a pound’, would be my motto if I were a brutal dictator intent on conquering and controlling the Gulf region."
As a sort of afterthought to what had been said previously, she declared: "Incidentally, in passing, one ought to remember that US intelligence actually misled the Saudis concerning the alleged offensive posture of Iraqi forces. More specifically, among other things, the US satellite photographs of Iraqi troop deployment along the Saudi border could only show possibilities. Those photos couldn't possibly have disclosed what the intentions of the Iraqis were concerning Saudi Arabia.
"The significance of the photos had to be interpreted in order to forge a link between troop deployment and Iraqi invasion intentions vis-a-vis Saudi Arabia. As it turns out, these interpretations of the satellite photos were wrong because Iraq never did invade Saudi Arabia.
"This misdirection by the United States played a key role in convincing the Saudis that an invasion of Saudi Arabia by Iraq was imminent. As a result, the Saudis acceded to US pressure to begin deploying US forces on Saudi soil.
"Whether the misdirection was intentional or inadvertent is not really clear.
Irrespective of which may be the case, it is unfortunate that the Saudis didn't appear to ask themselves a few questions.
"For instance, if Iraq really were intent on invading Saudi Arabia, why didn't the Iraqi forces take the plunge when it could have done so with a minimum number of casualties? Why didn't the Iraqis go ahead and invade Saudi Arabia when its international public image would not have taken much more of a beating than already was the case for having invaded Kuwait?
"There are quite a few people, both within Saudi Arabia as well as outside of that country, who would not shed any tears if the ruling Saudi monarchy were to be removed from its throne of power. An Iraqi invasion of Saudi Arabia might have brought a surprising mixture of responses from the four corners of the Muslim world, with the reaction of people in the streets being, very possibly, markedly different than the official statements issuing from those countries.
"In any event, the United States’ rapid deployment force would not have been able to adequately defend Saudi Arabia. It would have been up against a much larger Iraqi army with already established lines of communication and logistical support."
Professor Donaldson pursed her lips quickly, several times in succession. Her eyes were narrowed somewhat. Both of these physical features seemed to be external markers for an internal process of focus.
She arched her eyebrows, and her face appeared to have a quality which suggested she were considering various possibilities. Sharing these with her audience, she began: "One might reasonably anticipate that in the relatively few hours which a few Divisions of the Iraqi army would have needed to travel the roughly 175 miles to the Dhahran oil field complex from the border, the Iraqis already would have pretty much secured the area and been chowing down before the US would have been able to evaluate, coordinate, plan and launch an offensive of any kind even capable of reaching Dhahran, let alone be able to accomplish anything of an effective nature.
"In point of fact, the United States required 119 hours of preparation before it was ready to get Desert Shield off the ground. Roughly 19 hours were needed by the US in 1989 to prepare for its invasion of tiny Panama.
"Even using the latter, much shorter preparation time rather than the former, much longer prep time, the United States would have been in a difficult situation if Iraq had decided to invade Saudi Arabia. In my opinion, I believe the Iraqis were aware of this, and, therefore, if they didn't invade Saudi Arabia when they had the golden opportunity to do so, it is because, contrary to popular public opinion in the West, they never had the intention of invading Saudi Arabia."
Quickly expanding on, as well as attempting to fortify, her ideas, she followed up on her earlier points: "If I were a brutal dictator really intent on conquering the Middle East and bringing the West to its knees, then, by quickly invading Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, I would have accomplished two strategic objectives. First, I would have, at least for a time, a stranglehold on most of the world's oil reserves and, therefore, would have been in a position to deal with the rest of the world from strength. Secondly, by conquering Kuwait and, especially, Saudi Arabia, my tactical situation would have created tremendous problems for both the Arab world and the West to respond to militarily.
"Among other things, the Coalition forces would not have been permitted to do to Saudi Arabia what they did to Baghdad and the rest of Iraq without encountering serious political, economic and social repercussions. Getting a conquering army out of Saudi Arabia would have presented a very different set of problems for Coalition leaders than getting such an army out of just Kuwait.
"On the other hand, although Iraq might have been capable of over-running both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and, therefore, in the short run, creating many problems for the world, I do not believe Iraq would have been able to hold those countries even against a Coalition of countries from just the Middle East. After all, consider for a moment the fact that Iraq had been unable to defeat Iran despite receiving the support of the United States, the Soviet Union and most of the other countries of the Middle East. Consequently, if only Egypt, Syria and Iran, with, perhaps, help from Turkey and, maybe even, Israel, were to co-ordinate an attack against Iraq, I think Iraq would have had a very difficult time of retaining control of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia."
Dr. Donaldson had an expression on her face which seemed to indicate she was tired of such talk or, perhaps, that she had strayed too far afield. She made a sort of dismissive gesture with her hands, more to herself, possibly, than to anyone in the audience.
"In any event, if we leave such speculative scenarios aside, then there are a number of other considerations which undermine the contention that Iraq was intent on either swallowing up a number of Middle East countries or on bringing the West to its knees. For example, since the first Gulf war, the fact is, Iraq had developed much closer and more cordial relationships with a number of countries, including the United States.
"America had given Iraq considerable help during the Iran-Iraq war, despite being rather duplicitous toward Iraq in the Iran-Contra fiasco. Furthermore, as I indicated earlier, the United States had become Iraq's number one trading partner just prior to the second Gulf War.
"The United States had made billions of dollars in loans and credits available to the Iraqis. America also had helped Iraq to rebuild its military capabilities.
"Iraq wanted to be treated with respect and fairness by the United States. For the most part, things were moving in this direction.
"Iraq did have serious differences with the US over their respective policies concerning Israel and the Palestinians. Quite frankly, however, I don't believe the Iraqis would have considered it in their best interests to jeopardize their developing relationship with the United States by going on an imperialistic binge in the Middle East.
"I believe the second Gulf came about like most wars. A combination of misunderstanding, mis-communication, miscalculation, stubbornness, pride, posturing, stupidity, selfishness and blindness was exhibited by parties on all sides of the Gulf War issue.
"Iraq, despite all its faults, is not the enemy in the Gulf War. We are all the enemy.
"We all collectively join in to create mess after mess in both international and domestic affairs. The second Gulf War is not an exception to this central truth of world events. It is, regrettably, a most horrendous exemplar of what I am maintaining.
"Let me make one last comment in wrapping up my answer to your follow-up question Dr. Clarke. Everyone is convinced that allowing the control of much of the world's oil supplies to fall into the hands of countries like Iraq or Iran would be disastrous. I wouldn't wish to take issue with such a contention.
"At the same time, I'm not convinced the interests of the vast majority of the people of the Earth are better served, ultimately, by having control of much of the world's oil supplies in the hands of the United States. The governmental, military and corporate institutions of the United States are not necessarily the benign force of goodness which their spin-doctors try to convince everyone is the case. In fact, one could easily say the same thing about the governmental, military and corporate institutions of almost every country on the face of the earth."
| Return to Menu |
|
