Lecture 21: Impacts on the Middle East (II)
The American War in Iraq!
26th March 2003 (Wednesday)
Rationales of the Mid-term Examination
Grade to be Posted Before Next Wednesday (Hopefully) Question Analysis Next Wednesday (Hopefully) Roles of Examinations
Future-oriented: Grade [3-4-3] Enrichment-oriented: Performance [?-?-?]
Newspaper Reader or Newspaper Commentator? Political Science in the Perceptive Spectrum
Political Science (Logic, Methodology, Induction, Deduction)
History Water-blowing (Memorization) (Subjective Bluffing)
Question 3: In the Anti-Terror Coalition, which of the followings is NOT a rationale for these countries to participate? Britain – to elevate its national status by sticking to the Americans. Mexico – to look for financial rewards from the United States. Russia – to safeguard the achievements of the “Greek Plan” of Catherine
the Great. [=Russia as an Eurasian Empire, inc. Chechenya] USA – to pre-empt the terrorist threat of Afghanistan. Uzbekistan – to be removed from the American list of authoritarian countri
es.
Bush Doctrine I: Countries Chose to Harbor Terrorist = Terrorist (Vs Taliban) Implication 1: Countries Have the Right to Choose (Active) Implication 2: After Taking Side, the Countries are ALREADY the Terrorist,
Need to be PUNISHED/EXECUTED, Instead of PRE-EMPTEDBush Doctrine II: Countries Suspected of Future Terrorist Tendency Have to be
Pre-empted (Vs Iraq) Implication 1: Countries Do NOT Have the Right to Choose (Passive) Implication 2: After Being Assigned as Evil States, the Countries are POT
ENTIAL Threat of Terrorism, Need to be PRE-EMPTED, Instead of PUNISHED
Question 14: Which of the following countries CAN be attacked by the United States AFTER the introduction of the revised Bush Doctrine?
Afghanistan. Iraq. China. Britain. All of the above.
Bush Doctrine I: To the USA: Passive (wait for the decision of others) To other Countries: Active (can decide to take side)Bush Doctrine II: To the USA: Active (can define the terrorist threat) To other Countries: Passive (cannot even take side)
Which of the following countries CAN be attacked by the United States AFTER the introduction of the original Bush Doctrine?
None of the above.
Question 13: If Al Gore was elected as the American president in 2000, which of the followings is still MOST likely to happen after 911?
NOT Imaginary The Hidden Questions:1. What is the main difference between the foreign policy of the
Democratic Party (Clinton-Gore) and the Republic Party (Reagan-Bush Sr.-Bush Jr.)?
2. How are the choices categorized?
The American War against Afghanistan. [Multilateralism] The American War against Iraq. [Unilateralism] The declination of Russian membership in NATO. [Unilateralism] The formation of the Axis of Evil. [Unilateralism] All of the above are likely to happen after 911 even with Al Gore
as the president.
None of the above. a debatable option
Question 15: Through planning the 911 attack, Osama Bin Laden is likely to aim at the followings EXCEPT:
Not Imaginary The Hidden Questions:1. Are these options consistent to Islamic Fundamentalism that Osama Bin
Laden believes?2. Are they covered in the Grand Strategy of Laden’s Conspiracy Theory?
[invite American attack provoke the Muslims alienate the Western allies revolution of world order]
The American retreat from the Middle East. [step 1] The aroused conscious of Pan-Islamism through provoking the America
n revenge. [step 1 & 2] The change of status quo by removing America from the top. [step 4] The handover of corrupted Middle East regimes to SECULARISM.
Secularism (the rule of non-religion) = Enemy of Islamic Fundamentalism The current American War in Iraq. [step 1, 2 & 3]
The Methodological Training
To differentiate the very similar facts in the newspapers, which represent very different hidden agendas Bypass, cross, occupy, overcome, tackle…
To trace the MAIN origin of different facts contemporarily by the DEDUCTION logic
To predict the MAIN focus of different facts contemporarily by the INDUCTION logic
Inter-transferability in Real Life
Announcements on Guest Speakers
Israel Consul General Eli Avidar The Israeli-Palestinian Issue Lecture 19: 19th March 2003 (Wednesday) http://hongkong.mfa.gov.il
Indian Political Consul Anurag Goel Indian Response to 911 and the Regional Order Lecture 25: 31st March 2003 (Monday) Please Sign Up for Lunch Afterwards
Advice on Presentation of T1, 2B, 3B: http://pshweb01.881903.com/main/event/hot/hot20030314cr2bd.asx
Structure of Lecture 21: The First Gulf War (1990-
1991) Impacts of the First Gulf War Relationship between 911
and the Current American War in Iraq
Contrasting Diplomacy of the 2 Wars on Iraq What can you tell?
Conclusion: Macro Plans of the War?
Open Forum on the War
PART IThe First Gulf War
(1990-1991)
Early History of Iraq
The Glorious and “Warlike” History of the Iraqis: The Babylonian Empire Saddam’s Idol: King Nebucha
dnezzar The Islamic Empire and the
Arabian Nights Iraqis under Ottoman Rule
(1553-1914) Message from the “Restorati
on” of Babylonian Heritage by Saddam Hussein
British Imperialism in Middle East
Iraq as an Ottoman Province British Imperialism of 19th Century
The “3B Plan”: Berlin, Budapest and Baghdad
Imperialist Rival between Britain, France and Russia in the Middle East
British “Protection” of Kuwait (1898) and the Iraqi Response
Iraqi Became a British Protectorate after WWI (1920)
Relations with the Current British Role?
The Independent Iraq
1932: Independence of Iraq King Faisal I Concept of “Economic Impe
rialism” and “Semi-colony” 1958: Military Coup agains
t King Faisal II 1961: First Modern Claim
of Kuwait by General Qasim
Saddam Hussein and the “Least Islamist Islamic Country”
1968: Arab Socialist Baath (Resurrection) Party Purge of Islamic Fundamentalism!
1979: Saddam Hussein and the Revolutionary Command Committee (RCC)
1980-1988: Iran-Iraq War Ayatollah Khomeni and the Islamic
Revolution in Iran Saddam Hussein as the Great Sec
ular Leader CIA Support towards Iraq
Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait (Aug 1990)
Territorial Claim from History Comparison with “Irredentism” of
China Expansionism as a Ruling
Behavior of Dictators The Waning of Cold War Economic Solution to the Iran-
Iraq War The American “Go-ahead”
Signal?
International Response
United Nations Sanction and Condemnation Security Council – 14:0:1
Coalition Army of 34 Countries USA, Britain, NATO Gulf Cooperative Committee,
Egypt, Syria Desert Storm (Jan – April
1991)
PART IIResults of the First Gulf War
The Mystical Cease-fire
Conflicting Motivations within the American Government: Diplomatic Concern of
President George H W Bush Military Concern of the
Pentagon American Denunciation to
Support the Kurdish Minority Continuation of the Saddam
Regime “Preferable”
Partition of Iraq
The Saddam Regime “Kurdish Regional Gover
nment” in the North The Separatist Movement
of “Kurdistan” “Protectorates” of the Shi
’ites (No-Fly Zone) The New Iranian-Iraqi Rel
ationship
United Nations Sanctions
1990: Economic Sanctions 1991: End of Iraq’s Mass Destruction Weapons 1995: “Oil for Food” Program 1998: “Operation Desert Fox”
Saddam: 1.7million deaths 1991-2002 Resignation of United Nations Inspectors in
Protest
Long-term International Reactions
Rise of Pax Americana American troops in Saudi Ara
bia Kuwait as an American Prote
ctorate The Oil Value of the Gulf Co
operative Committee Rise of Anti-Americanism
Osama Bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and Gulf War
Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia
PART IIIRelationship between911 and the Current
American War in Iraq
Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein?
USA: Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein
are allies Al-Qaeda in the Iraqi Government Iraq provides technical assistance
to Laden
Rival between Laden and Saddam Islamic Fundamentalism Vs Secul
arism Personal Rival for the Arabic Lead
ership
Message Behind the Change of Iraqi National Flag (1991)
Red/ White/ Black: colors of the Socialists
The “takbir” =
God is Great
Mass Destruction Weapons (MDW)?
Mass Destruction Weapons: A Range of Destruction Wi
der than the Sense of Self-Defense
Causing “Mass Destruction”
Chemical, Biological, Nuclear Weapons
Aggressive History of Iraq United Nations Inspector Han
s Blix
Iraq in the Axis of Evil
Axis of Evil (January 2002): Iran, Iraq, North Korea Targets of American “Pre-emptiv
e” Strategy
Comparison with North Korea President Kim Jong Il – mad or s
mart? Recognition of Mass Destruction
Weapon China and Russia as the Backsta
ge Boss? The American Tolerance or the
Next Target?
Popularity of President George W Bush
Popularity of George W Bush: Over 80% after 911 Highest since President FD
Roosevelt American Polls Today:
75% In Favor of the War! Election Concern?
The Confidential “Post-Saddam Iraqi Order Proposal” of USA
Proposal right after 911 – or even earlier Marshall Plan of 21st Century
to Save the US Economy Cheap Oil for 100 Years Establishment of “Democratic
Government” as an American Ally
Basis of Future American Campaign in the Middle East
Model: US Occupation of Japan after WWII
Assigned Readings Main Text: Found Ajami: “The Uneasy
Imperium – Pax Americana in the Middle East” (H&R P.15-30)
Supplementary Text: CNN Showdown Iraq Special (
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/iraq/) CNN War in Iraq Special http://www.cnn.com/SP
ECIALS/2003/iraq/ BBC War in Iraq Special http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/
hi/in_depth/middle_east/2002/conflict_with_iraq/default.stm
Arabic Peninsula Information http://www.aljazeerah.info/
China Xinhua Agency War in Irq Special http://www.xinhuanet.com/newscenter/mywj/index.htm
PART IV Contrasting
Diplomacy of the Two American
Wars on Iraq
The Great Diplomatic Paradox
USA 1991: Everything was Diplomatic Acceptance of Previous Enemies into the C
oalition (Syria) Toleration of “Undemocratic” Allies (KSA) Respect towards Other Nations (Russia, Ch
ina) In the Name of United Nations
USA 2002-2003: Every was “Anti-diplomatic” –
The Great Diplomatic Paradox (II)
Iraq 1990-1991: Everything but Diplomatic Alienation of Islamic Support Isolation in the World
Iraq 2002-2003: Everything but Anti-diplomatic Mass Opinion War Respect of United Nations and
Big Powers Arousing Islamic Consciousness
Contrasting Reactions of the Islamic World
Syria: from joining the coalition army to semi-alliance with Iraq
KSA: from sponsor of Gulf War to the next American target
Kuwait and Gulf Cooperative Committee: from happy to worry
Pakistan: the path towards anti-America
Indonesia: the pathtowards anti-America
Contrasting Reactions of the Traditional American Allies
Britain: from massive support to anti-war public
NATO: from closest partner to the diplomatic coup of France and Germany
Turkey: disallowance of lending its basis
Disappearance of French Toast in USA
Contrasting Reactions from other World Powers
Russia: from a peace broker of the First Gulf War to an opposition party of the Second Gulf War
China: from neutral to supporting the Franco-German Proposal
United Nations: from the symbolic worldwide leadership to its downfall Experience of the League of
Nations
Coalition of the Willing 45 Members (Military OR Symbolic) Vs the Rest 160 of the World 1991: 34 Military Members and More than 100 “Symbolic Members” Western Traditional Allies (9): Australia, Britain, Denmark, Iceland, I
taly, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Turkey Eastern Europe (13): Albania, Azerbajian, Bulgaria, Czech Rep, Est
onia, Georgia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia
Asian Allies (5): Japan, Philippines, Mongolia, Singapore, South Korea
Islamic Countries (3): Afghanistan, Kuwait, Uzbekistan Latin America (6): Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El S
alvador, Honduras, Nicaragua Africa (4): Eritrea, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda Pacific Islands (4): Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Solomon Is
lands
Conclusion:Macro Purpose
of the War?
The Osama Bin LadenProposal: A Revision
Provocative Strategy America occupation of Afghanistan
to be Repeated in Iraq Anti-Americanism Islamic Fundamentalists
gained power from the corruptive Islamic States
Alienation of the America Allies
Pan-Islamic Empire
Provocative Strategy of George W Bush?
Anything but diplomatic = everything about non-diplomatic Provoking all sorts of anti-Am
erican sentiment in the region Excuse to overthrow them all Establish a new world order b
ased on American interests in the Middle East
Even tuning down the influence of ex-allies of the “Old World”……
Open Forum
Surprised by the American Efficiency?
Surprised by the Republican Guard of Iraq?
Misled/ Confused by the Psychological War?
How long will it last?
Any possibilities for America to lose?
What will be its impacts?