The Iraq War Should Be Defined as an Unjust War

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 7 July 2016
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by William Torres. Edited by Shelby Stillwell.
On July 6, the report of the Iraq Inquiry Committee established by former Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s administration will be released to the public. The chairman of the committee says that claims that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were definitely groundless, and the reasons to go to war were “completely inefficient.”* The chairman concludes that future wars must be pursued with caution.

Taking seven years to complete, the Chilcot Inquiry Report encompasses wartime decisions, legal bases, war equipment problems and so on. The report concludes that the British prime minister at the time, Tony Blair, cannot avoid blame for the war.

The Iraq War was based on bad intelligence, a conclusion which has been the general consensus of the entire international community, including Western society. The Iraq War claimed 179 British and thousands of U.S. military lives, as well as the lives of hundreds of thousands Iraqi citizens. The war also upset the original structure and power of the Middle East. The chaos present in the Middle East today has much to do with the war. It is clear that these evil consequences require an explanation; the Chilcot Report both explains this and also paints a clear picture of the British-American elite.

Blair and England can only be called an “accessory” to the Iraq War; President George W. Bush and his administration are really the “principal offenders” for launching the war. At the time, Saddam Hussein had just been overthrown, Bush ordered a large amount of materiel and manpower to look for Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction,” but the U.S. ended up empty handed. Such a big mistake is impossible to cover up, and yet the U.S. has adopted a “bland” attitude.

The Chilcot Report has emerged too late. At the moment, the effort to improve the schism and chaos of war in Iraq is not working, English-American political strategy is not having a very big impact. The hanging of Saddam years ago did not bring any comfort to Western countries. Nevertheless, war deliberations have taken a dramatic turn since they began and are likely to offer much upon which to reflect. Even if modern Western society is unwilling to reflect on the meaning of this, history will help them do so.

First, there was faulty intelligence from the Iraq War, and at the time, the English and the Americans, acting with completely false information, told people to believe in them. American and British strategy guided the entire society’s way of thinking and reasoning. Intelligence agencies and mainstream media make strategic decisions in the best interest of the country. This has to do with “political correctness” to such an extent that if a presumption is wrong, all of society nevertheless follows along.

Second, the U.S. did not launch the Iraq War on such a large scale only to remove Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction.” Before the war, Western investigators had already said that Iraq did not have the capability to produce nuclear weapons, long distance missiles or biological weapons. Bush’s administration’s primary goal was to topple Saddam’s regime, and the American elite more or less tacitly understood this. It is because of this that the Chilcot Report’s findings on America’s impact with respect to the attack are limited.

Third, the Iraq War did not have United Nations Security Council approval. British and American armies defied the Security Council in launching the war. This is the kind of headstrong behavior that comes from arrogance and prejudice. It is this same kind of thing that has its roots in the American elite, whose misconceptions and “disinformation” about the world still prevail in the United States.

Fourth, the start of the war by the United States and England should be considered unjust, and yet world opinion has not seen it this way. The U.S. and England are much more willing to reduce mistakes to a matter of “bad intelligence” and use the “justice” of overthrowing one dictator to cover up the mistakes, overlooking the injustice inflicted on several hundred thousand civilian lives, the ruination of regional peace and the creation of an influx of terrorism.

Fifth, in the years after the Iraq War, people are gradually realizing that the Middle East cannot be changed. Describing the Bush administration’s plan to “change the Middle East” as unimportant is idealistic, but saying that it was important is only political and cultural arrogance. Viewed within today’s political and cultural context, the United States has refused to strengthen the awareness of society or to speak out about the situation.

Sixth, the Iraq War opened a Pandora’s box in the Middle East; releasing many demons that cannot be put back. By examining themselves in the Chilcot Report, the English have shown much courage, but on the other hand, the Western system continues to shirk responsibility. Of all the mistakes made during the Iraq War, neither the U.S. nor England accepts direct responsibility. The U.S. and England throughout the entire process were “correct,” “just,” and “conscientious,” but to add them all together is wrong. The West is just so wonderful.

*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, the quote of the committee chairman could not be independently verified.


由英国布朗政府授权所做的伊拉克战争调查报告6日公之于众,负责该报告的齐尔考特说,肯定伊拉克大规模杀伤性武器存在的这种说法站不住脚,而对战后的计划“完全不充分”。他认为,未来战争要更加谨慎。
齐尔考特报告的完成历时7年,它涵盖了战争的决定、法律依据、战争的装备问题等等。报告认为,时任英国首相布莱尔对伊战负有不可推卸的责任。
伊拉克战争是基于错误情报所发动的,这早已是包括西方社会在内的整个国际社会的共识。战争造成179名英国军人死亡,数千美军官兵死亡,而伊拉克死亡的民众则有几十万。这场战争还打乱了中东原有的地区结构和力量结构,中东今天的大混乱与那场战争有很大关系。一目了然的这些恶果要求有所交待,齐尔考特报告既是这样的交待,也是英美主流精英们希望最终画出的句号。
布莱尔和英国只能算是伊拉克战争的“从犯”,布什政府和美国才是发动那场错误战争的“主犯”。当年萨达姆刚被推翻,布什就下令投入大量人力物力查找伊拉克的“大规模杀伤性武器”,但一无所获。这么大的错误是无法掩盖的,但是美国一直采取了“淡化”它的态度。
齐尔考特报告来得太晚了,对改善伊拉克当下分裂和战乱的局面毫无帮助,对英美现实政治的影响也不会很大。早已被绞死的萨达姆也不会因此在西方受到同情。但是从战争酝酿发动到这份报告形成的戏剧性过程还是会提供不少思考,即使西方社会现在不愿意这样思考,历史会帮他们思考。
首先,伊战的情报错误和当时美英社会从上到下对假情报的笃信告诉人们,美英的战略决定足以主导全社会的思考方式和逻辑建构。情报部门和主流媒体都会为国家的战略决定服务。这是一个有相当“政治正确性”的体系,以至于一个关键的前提错了,整个社会都跟着一起错。
第二,美国发动伊战的目的很大程度上就不是冲着“大规模杀伤性武器”去的,因为战前就已经有西方核查人士站出来说伊拉克既无发展核武能力,也无中远程导弹和生化武器。布什政府的最大目的就是推翻萨达姆政权,美国精英们当时就多少有些心领神会。正因为此,齐尔考特报告这一类的发现对美国的冲击力非常有限。
第三,伊拉克战争没有得到安理会授权,美英联军是顶着安理会的意志发动战争的。这样的刚愎自用来自于傲慢与偏见,而这样的根源今天仍深植于美国精英社会,错误认识世界的“假情报”仍不时主导美国。
第四,美英发动的伊拉克战争应被确定为非正义战争,但是这样的定性并没有在国际舆论场上得以确立。美英至今更愿意把整个战争的错误缩小为“情报错误”,用推翻一个独裁者的“正义”来掩盖夺去几十万平民生命和断送一个地区和平、造成恐怖主义严重泛滥的非正义。
第五,很多人在伊战十几年之后渐渐悟出,中东是不可改造的,布什政府当时“改造中东”的计划说轻了是理想主义,说重了就是政治和文化狂妄。但是囿于今天的政治及文化竞争,美国主流社会不肯强化这个意识,更不肯把它大声说出来。
第六,伊战打开了中东的“潘多拉盒子”,很多被放出的魔鬼不可能再装回去。齐尔考特报告反映了英国自我揭丑的一种勇气,但是另一方面西方的体制有很强的脱责能力,出了伊战这么大的错误,美英没有一人直接担责。美英在全过程中的每一个时刻都“正确”、“正义”、“有良知”,但加在一起又是错的。西方就是这么奇妙。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal

China: White House Peddling Snake Oil as Medicine

China: Prime Take: How Do Americans View US Tariff Hikes?

Previous article
Next article