U.S. Foreign Policy After the War

¶ … post war policies that the U.S. And the world have adopted towards Iraq. It has 8 sources.

The war in Iraq and the protests of people around the world has given a clear signal to the American government and policy makers that the world has become a different place. That every attempt of American expansionism and corporate imperialism will be opposed, the unilateral policies of United States has to change and being a superpower it has to realize its responsibilities. The opposition from the European countries, the Arab community and China should be a great concern to America. The American foreign policies clearly show that the goal of its leader is to expand the American empire with the method of progressive imperialism. The United States because of its policies has become isolated in the world and has become an object of hatred around the world. If the unilateral and expansionism policies are continued the fate of American empire will not be different from Roman Empire.

It has been more than a year since the devastating attacks took place on September 11th in United States, which shook the American society to the core and brought about far reaching changes to the U.S. policies both home and abroad. The attacks exposed Americans to threats and challenges never faced before and proved that even the most powerful country in the world is not immune to such threats. In addition astronomical defense budgets and expensive security measures are insufficient to buy peace and security for the American People. More than anything else the attacks indicated to American government that how small the world has become and how vital it is for a superpower like America to cooperate and acquire support in order to guarantee the security for its people and to eliminate terrorism. Instead from learning from its past mistakes and its unbalanced foreign policies especially in the Middle East, the United States has embarked on a unilateralism and expansionism.

At this point of time:

The American troops in Iraq now hold almost 80% of the country, the Iraqi regime posed little resistance and all the media hype about the strong resistance from Iraqi regime were proved to be false. Though Saddam Hussein and the top leaders of the regime are not caught yet, there is strong tension and opposition inside Iraq on the U.S. led invasion. The American troops saw that the situation in Iraq is completely different, only after the first day of little celebrations, when the statues of Saddam Hussein were destroyed; there were rallies and protests in the country against the U.S. troops. The Iraqi people cam out with banners saying we want the invaders out, it is obvious that they don't see the troops as liberators but as invaders. The Bush administrations on the other hand has taken a sigh of relief as most of the political and war analysts predicted that the war could go on too long and if that would have happened it would have been very difficult for the administration to handle the situation back home. The average Americans are satisfied with the war and its results, more than 60% of the Americans supported the war, but the numbers would have change drastically had the war prolonged [Louis, 2003].

On the other hand the issue of United Nations involvement in the post-war Iraq is strongly debated and stressed by Germany, France, Russia and China. The European nations including the United Kingdom want a UN led government and reconstruction in Iraq. The European nations like France, Germany and Russia already have a view that the war is being waged without the United Nations authority and in violation of the UN Charter. They argue that because the war is illegal the post-war U.S. occupation will be illegal too. The U.S. is determined that its military will rule Iraq when the war has ended. The Arab nations who were against the war in the first place are also against any U.S. military rule in Iraq and they see it as U.S. expansion in the Middle East and a method to control oil of Iraq. China and other Islamic countries are also stressing a UN-based government, but it seems that U.S. will not withdraw from its position. Thus there is an overwhelming opposition to the U.S. war in Iraq and the military rule after the war, the United States is proceeding in its unilateral methods and even British Prime Minister is against the U.S. military control of Iraq. There is a very strong opinion among the people of the world of the U.S. policies and a majority of people in the world today see U.S. war in Iraq as a method to control the resources of the country and to expand American imperialism [Phyllis, 2003]. The opposition is gradually growing, the European Union has refused to donate anything in a post-war Iraq without United Nations, and the Arabs are criticizing the bias and unbalanced policies of U.S. And its support of Israel. Though in the U.S. It seems alright and that the war has been won with great power the ramification of these policies can prove to be very dangerous in the long run, The U.S. has to bring a change in its foreign policy.

The Bush doctrine:

President George Walker Bush in his June 1 address gave away the future strategy of U.S. foreign policy and which is been famously termed as "The Bush doctrine." President Bush in his address warned that in this new complex world the United States faced a threat with no precedent, through the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the emergence of global terrorism, Bush said that the traditional strategies of deterrence and containment could not work and were not longer sufficient. Deterrence meant nothing "against shadowy terrorist networks with no nation or citizens to defend" and containment could not work "when unbalanced dictators with weapons of mass destruction can deliver those weapons on missiles or secretly provide them to terrorist allies" [Dworkin, 2002]. Under these circumstances, he concluded, "If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long." This doctrine according to Bush is necessary to protect the United States from any further attacks and threats from dictators, and terrorists. It is this doctrine after the September 11 which has gone in its way to tear up the international agreements and undermine international institutions. The doctrine basically says that American government can do anything, can bypass every institution and laws to fulfill its interests. The Bush administration has committed this nation to a course it has never in its history taken before. Preventive wars against possible threats will now be official U.S. foreign policy. War with Iraq, in other words, is only the debut of a program whose goal is permanent U.S. global military dominance. This is not hyperbole; it is now enshrined, codified, in U.S. national security doctrine. The real goals of the war are American expansion, the expansion of American military and economic power [Pemberton, 2003].

Iraq:

Just as Osama Bin Laden was a creation of American CIA in Afghanistan in the Russian war, Saddam Hussein had been a strong ally and friend of White House for more than 12 years of his regime. Just as Osama Bin Laden was created by the CIA to fight against Russia for the American interest Saddam Hussein was getting weapons on a regular basis from America in the 11-year Iran-Iraq war which virtually destroyed Iran. It is no mystery that United States and Russia supported different dictators and fascists in the Cold-War, both supplied weapons to different countries and even supported some of the regimes in Africa and Middle East. Saddam Hussein was a close ally of the United States in the Iran-Iraq war and the U.S. provided weapons to Iraq in its war against Iraq. It is when Saddam Hussein attacked Kuwait another Islamic country on its borders that U.S. attacked Iraq in Gulf War but after the war left the Saddam regime enact. Just like after the Russian wars the Taliban's and Osama Bin Laden were left abruptly, as soon as U.S. interest was over, the Saddam regime was left too. After September 11 and Afghanistan war the U.S. claimed that Iraq have weapon of mass destruction which are potential threat to United States and that it wanted to restore the democracy in the country. Iraq had been under U.S. And U.N. sanctions for almost 10 years, the population had little food and there were shortage of water and medicine in the country. The country was barely surviving, and it is hard to say it could have developed chemical weapons. Saddam a dictator ruling for over 25 years had plunged the country into three wars; the U.S. had supported him in one of the wars and left him in office after the Gulf War. It is difficult to comprehend the U.S. [Barry & Lobe, 2003]. foreign policy regarding Iraq as U.S. suddenly decided that Iraq had Chemical weapons and was so urgent in its attack on Iraq that it bypassed all the international laws and institutions which were once made by the country itself.

The Middle East:

Israel Problem: American foreign policy has always supportive to Israel. Middle East is perhaps the most consistent area of conflict since the Second World War. It has experience wars and devastation during the past and one of the major factors is the foundation of Israel in 1948. There are has been relentless hostility and several wars were fought between the Arab states and Israel. This conflict continues till today and although the wars were won by Israel because of its major ally United States, there are deepening hostilities towards both Israel and United States. The United States as the world superpower not only has failed to solve this problem one of the major source of conflict in the world today but has been always supportive of Israel's occupation and its use of military in Palestine. This bias and unbalanced foreign policy is criticized all over the world, many Arab nations argue that Israel has got nuclear and Chemical weapons too, thus why war on Iraq and not on Israel. It is obvious that the Jewish lobby in the United States is very strong, most of the Republicans and Democrats funding is done by the American Jewish community and thus United States have a soft corner for Israel. The U.S. have to come up with some sort of plan or formula to solve the Middle East issue, it should be in the number one list of United States [Tolson, 2003].

The Arab Nations:

The Arab nations have always mistrusted United States and hated for its support of Israel. Although United States is the biggest buyer of the Arab oil and it also has military base in many of the Arab countries, Arab nations do not trust United States. One of the biggest factors is the U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, according to Arabs the United States has systematically targeted Islam and Muslims after the September 11 attacks. To many these attacks were a result of the poor foreign policy of the U.S. If United States after the war in Iraq does not come up with a solution of Middle East the Arab hostilities can turn into a dangerous situation. The Middle East issue is the root of most of the problems in the region and elsewhere once United States comes up with a balancing and lasting solution it can help a long way in creating 'good' and meaningful relations with Arab states and will also help to improve U.S. position in the international community.

Traditional European Allies:

United Kingdom:

Britain has been a close ally of America in the recent decades, it was the only Nation beside Australia who supported U.S. war in Iraq and took active participation in the war. The Prime Minister Tony Blair had to go through severe criticism both within the country and outside the country for supporting the war. Two of the cabinet members resigned to protest the governments involvement in the Iraq war, though Britain participated against the public opinion and opposition from Tony Blair's own government, the prime minister Tony Blair emphasized on two things, one that United Nations will have a great role to play after the war and that after this war all the focus of the allies will be one a peaceful and lasting solution of the Middle East. It is clear that Tony Blair could not ensure the role of United Nations in post-war Iraq; this has made Britain one of the strongest allies of U.S. suspicious of the U.S. policies and it can see that the U.S. is embarking on a unilateral policy in pursuit of self-interest. This can make Britain to reconsider its position regarding its support of the U.S. The U.S. policies if not changed will make it isolated in the world and will find itself facing opposition from bigger nations in the world.