Bush Administration Justifications for the Iraq War Examined

Bush Administration Claims About the Iraq War

When the United States initiated war with Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration claimed it was in an effort to eliminate terrorism groups operating in Iraq and in response to Iraq's alleged possession and use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). As one scholar observes, "These claims will move us into careful considerations of the Iraq war as a form of self-defense, law enforcement, and rescue, which will thereby take us into moral and practical implications of U.S. foreign policy" (Miller, 2008). Today, it is known that American military forces and UN advisers never found any WMD on Iraqi soil, and that the conflict continued even as military troops were gradually withdrawn from the country. Miller further notes, "The Bush administration insisted that Baghdad could use such weapons against its neighbors or against the United States, or could ally itself with terrorist organizations, such as al-Qaeda, which could use WMD to pursue terrorist attacks against the United States and its interests" (Miller, 2008). The administration used these alarming claims to frighten the American public and justify the invasion, then downplayed the results when the military uncovered no evidence of WMD as the war continued.

Many critics of the war and the Bush administration believe that members of the administration had wanted to invade Iraq and remove dictator Saddam Hussein for many years. Many of these officials were extremely close to Vice President Dick Cheney, which helped them secure high-ranking posts in the administration. An expert on US foreign policy notes that the group was calling for action against Iraq as early as 1992, and that it "began calling for 'regime change' in Iraq in 1998 and that, nine days after the 9/11 attack on New York and the Pentagon, publicly warned that any 'war on terror' that excluded Hussein's elimination would necessarily be incomplete" (Lobe, 2009). There was therefore significant interest in removing Saddam Hussein from power long before George W. Bush took office, and that interest persisted among key members of his administration. This casts serious doubt on the administration's stated reasons for the invasion.

While the administration maintained the war was necessary to prevent an attack on the United States and to destroy WMD, the real motivations may have differed considerably from those made public. A study commissioned by the administration itself found that Hussein had no desire to develop weapons for use against the United States; his focus was actually on neighboring Iran, against which he had previously gone to war. He also sought to end UN sanctions against his country. As Miller notes, "It was more important for Saddam to end U.N. sanctions, not develop his weapons arsenal. Indeed, the Duelfer report contradicts virtually every prewar claim by Washington about the danger that Saddam posed to the United States" (Miller, 2008).

American Imperialistic Power

Many critics of the war believe the Bush administration used it to project a message of power and dominance to other world leaders — including those in China and Russia — and to demonstrate the United States' formidable military capabilities. One writer observes, "Indeed, a demonstration of such power could well be the fastest way to formalize a new international order based on the overwhelming military power of the United States, unequalled at least since the Roman Empire" (Lobe, 2009). While the administration would likely dispute this interpretation, the world witnessed a more aggressive side of the United States during this conflict, which may have substantially altered how other nations perceive American intentions and military reach.

Many other countries joined the United States in Iraq, including Great Britain, Japan, and others. Since then, many of those nations have withdrawn their troops, and as the conflict persisted, the question of when all American forces would finally return home remained unresolved. Few anticipated the war would last as long as it did, and many American citizens grew weary of the conflict, its financial costs, and the ongoing instability in Iraq.

The Israel Connection

Many observers also believe the war was partly intended to reinforce Israel's power and security in the region. Lobe writes that ousting Hussein and installing a pro-Western leader "was the key to destabilising Israel's Arab enemies and/or bending them to its will. This would permit the Jewish state not only to escape the Oslo peace process, but also to secure as much of the occupied Palestinian (and Syrian) territories as it wished" (Lobe, 2009). Most media outlets and administration officials downplayed any Israeli connection to the war, although Israel grew increasingly assertive in subsequent years, drawing criticism from the Obama administration and creating notable tension between the two countries.