Encyclopedia > Predicted effects of invading Iraq

  Article Content

Predicted effects of invading Iraq

Predicted effects of invading Iraq are those predicted prior to the actual invasion, not those that actually happened, nor new effects alleged after the fact.

Prior to the invasion, global news sources reported the following possible, alleged, reputed or expected effects of the U.S. plan to invade Iraq. The interest was triggered by the American announcement that the plan would be executed in early 2003, "in weeks not months", as put by G. W. Bush. This was presumed to have either a strong positive or strong negative impact on world politics, depending on one's point of view and assumptions. This article presents a neutral list of the effects predicted by both supporters and detractors of the plan, prior to the event, as background to the main article on the Iraq crisis of 2003 - see its timeline for current events.

More effects are predicted by opponents of the plan than those favoring it. For balance, we present first the list of effects predicted by those favoring the plan, which include:

Opponents of the plan claimed to seek some of these same outcomes by means other than war. They often argued that some of the problems the U.S. plan seeks to overcome, such as high oil prices, challenges to the United Nations' authority, UN sanctions against Iraq[?] of twelve years' standing, and high tensions between France, China, Russia and the US (these being three of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council), were all a direct or indirect result of US policies that have been in effect from at least 1986 and especially since 1991. Changing some of these policies, including removing U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia[?] (as Al Qaeda and more recently some Saudi officials have also demanded), ending or relaxing sanctions that have had no effect on Saddam Hussein's grip on power, and respecting both the authority and pace of the United Nations, they argued, was likely to lead to reduced tension. Attacking Iraq on a US timetable they claimed would lead to:

negative ecological effects on the

an increase in Islamist activity leading to

  • a drop in world tourism, especially by air, as fears of Islamist retaliations rise
  • a general increase in the credibility of Islamist claims that the United States seeks hegemony in the oil-producing regions of the Gulf.
  • a resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan
  • increased Al Qaeda recruiting in all countries where they are active
  • attacks on UN forces in Afghanistan[?]
  • one or more Islamist revolutions in Arabia: Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and especially Saudi Arabia and Egypt - possibly supported from Iran, maybe as a distraction to avoid being invaded themselves
  • threats to the political stability of Arabia especially the monarchies of Jordan, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, as militant but not terrorist Islamists gain credibility, and especially if US, British, or Turkish forces remain anywhere in the region after the war
  • a deteriorating relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia especially if Wahhabist Saudi Princes gain control of the country, and US forces remain in the region
  • Islamist terrorism elsewhere, especially against American and British citizens
  • attacks on, and suppression of, moderate figures in modern Islamic philosophy who might otherwise successfully limit Islamist influence

instability in Iraq after a war possibly including

drastic changes to the balance of power in the oil industry due to

  • lost public ownership of Iraq's oil reserves, fields, infrastructure and contracts
  • US, UK, and Turkish control of Iraq's oil supplies which presently flow mostly to Europe
  • higher oil prices long-term due to US de facto control of world supply on the markets
  • oil imperialism as Caspian Sea oil resources are developed under the control of the global military hegemony of the United States

dangerous diplomatic power shifts including

negative domestic UK political impacts on the

negative domestic US political impacts on the

  • safety of American citizens travelling abroad
  • United States Democratic Party - which has not openly or severely criticized Bush's plan
  • U.S. Green Party - which is the only party clearly against the war, and gaining support due to the Democratic Party's lack of condemnation of the Bush unilateral policies
  • role of Colin Powell within the G. W. Bush administration
  • credibility of the US government and its handling of evidence in international decisions
    • Office of Strategic Influence fiasco
    • acceptance of US wiretap and satellite evidence by the UN (see technology issues below)
  • prospects for re-election of Bush/Cheney in the U.S. presidential election, 2004
  • relationship with Canada[?] especially if they split on Iraq badly
  • relationship with Mexico[?] especially if they split on Iraq badly
  • attitude of the U.S. public towards aid to dictators friendly to the U.S.
  • world prestige of the US if things go badly or a large number of US troops are killed

destabilizing influence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due to

increasing fear in other nations not known for political stability or sanity, including

negative impacts of the use of technology and public support for technology-focused wars, esp.

The predicted effects were often cited in United Nations actions regarding Iraq, popular opposition to war on Iraq and global protests against war on Iraq. As American popular opinion of war on Iraq has changed to reflect doubts about the outcomes of war, it forced the American government position on war on Iraq to change somewhat, and [[worldwide government positions on war on Iraq] increasingly isolated the American push to war. In particular, the objections abov caused significant rifts within the UK Labour Party, threatening a challenge to the leadership of Anthony Blair that, as of the end of June 2003, is still ongoing. Public relations plans for war on Iraq also changed to address dire predictions in the above. The U.S. plan to invade Iraq itself changed somewhat, with a decreased role for Turkey due to Kurdish concerns.

See also The UN Security Council and the Iraq war, and Iraq crisis of 2003, predicted effects of invading Iran, predicted effects of invading Syria[?], predicted effects of Kurdish separation from Iraq[?].

All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License

  Search Encyclopedia

Search over one million articles, find something about almost anything!
  Featured Article
East Hampton North, New York

... is $45,347, and the median income for a family is $55,357. Males have a median income of $38,566 versus $29,750 for females. The per capita income for the town is $25,725. ...

This page was created in 69.1 ms