Loss and Gain on the Seventh Anniversary of the War in Iraq

On March 19, 2003, the United States and its allies launched a bloody war of aggression against the land of the Tigris and Euphrates — a war that was illegal, unjustified and destructive all at once, and that ended in Iraq’s occupation. The occupation in turn has led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of victims and has made millions of Iraqis homeless, both inside and outside the country. At that same time in 2003, the U.N. Security Council issued resolution 1483, in which it confirmed the occupation of Iraq by the United States of America.

After seven years of the occupation of hate, many questions are in need of answers, such as: How did Iraq change after the occupation? Did the American occupier and its allies come to make life better in Iraq? Were the dishonest promises and slogans fulfilled? After seven years of the occupation of hate, where is the country now in the midst of all the death and displacement of its citizens? Were Bush’s promises of freedom and democracy achieved? Is there anything positive to speak of at all after so many years of occupation?

It has become clear that the American administration’s vision of Iraq after occupation was never pretty or rosy. They advertised so much during the mobilization for war on Iraq, even the exact moment of the invasion, and now, after seven years of their illegal war on Iraq, there has not been any progress to speak of on any level. Actually, all factors indicate that the country is in a state of regression in all fields; that things are getting worse by the day; and that every attempt to improve the occupation’s awful reputation have had no effect in light of nonexistent security and an economy that has gotten progressively worse, with growing unemployment, a lack of basic services, the absence of law, worsening corruption, and the decline of education and health infrastructure in a country that once took pride in its place among the vanguard of the third world, in terms of education and health.

When speaking of the war in Iraq, it is impossible to forget all the lies, deceptions and fabrications that were spouted off by the American propaganda machine specifically, and by the Western propaganda machine in general, especially by Britain. One also cannot forget the reasons used to justify the repression and occupation of Iraq that were later proven to be false and misleading, and proved to be based on the skewing and fabrication of information on an unprecedented scale.

And now, on the seventh anniversary of the occupation, it has come to light that much of the USA’s original goals have proven unattainable and unachievable, although this does not prevent us from pointing out that there have been some things accomplished that were intended by the invasion. One can say that Iraq was meticulously and intentionally destroyed, and Iraq’s capabilities and foundations, built with much of Iraq’s own money, time and effort, were undermined, setting the country back tens, if not hundreds of years. It is without a doubt that this was a planned objective of the invasion. In addition, Iraq’s place in the stand against the Zionist establishment of Israel was nullified, having once carried much economic and military strength, as well as manpower, to deter Israel. Furthermore, it is necessary to point out that, after these seven years of occupation, Iraq has become one of the most corrupt nations in the world.

There is not a doubt that the United States has been able to keep Iraq under its control, in addition to placing the country in a cycle of submission and reliance by making Iraq sign a number of treaties. Yet, despite all the U.S. has done in Iraq, it has still failed to partition Iraq into three separate nations — one of the main objectives of the invasion — and it has failed to incite a civil war in the country, despite all its efforts to this end. Neighboring Iran also had a hand in this endeavor to divide Iraq and, in fact, Iran shares many of the same interests as the United States with regard to Iraq’s fate — to this end, the two have been in competition to control both Iraq and the region as a whole. The U.S. received support from 49 countries for its campaign to invade Iraq in what was known as a “coalition of the willing.” However, in all practicality this coalition was not all that strong, since 98 percent of the total participating military forces were American and British.

The total number of soldiers in the coalition of the willing was 300,884, distributed among the participating countries as follows: USA, 250,000 troops (83 percent); Britain, 45,000 troops (15 percent); South Korea, 3,500 troops (1.1 percent); Australia, 2,000 troops (0.6 percent); Denmark, 200 troops (0.06 percent); Poland, 184 troops (0.06 percent); in addition to ten other countries that contributed small numbers of non-combatant forces.

According to international reports, this war has caused the largest loss of human life among civilians in the history of Iraq and in the history of the American military in decades. The official figures of the American Department of Defense (the Pentagon) state that 4,703 occupational troops have been killed, 4,385 military servicemen among them, and there have been 31,616 American casualties over the seven years. However, many analysts have cast doubt on these figures, asserting that the real numbers are much higher.

Two Iraqi research centers revealed new figures for the losses of American forces that stand in stark contrast to the figures the American Department of Defense released. The research division at the Oma Center for Research and Development has announced that, from the beginning of the invasion in 2003 through the end of 2009, the number killed in the ranks of the American military in Iraq was approximately 50,000 troops, and that more than 1,600,000 American soldiers have rotated in and out of service in Iraq in the past seven years.

According to the figures reached by the Istiqlal Center for Research and Studies, the number killed in the American military was 33,615 through July 2009, while the number of casualties was 224,000. The center used objective research methods and standards to come to these numbers, primarily relying on sound American sources and reports. The Istiqlal Center also released what it determined to be the number of attacks American forces have endured, citing 164,000 recorded attacks on the American military categorized as “violent or significant.” It went on to infer the inaccuracy of the American Department of Defense’s data, citing a source from America itself, the Baker-Hamilton report, which was published in 2007 and discusses the situation in Iraq in the year 2006. The report states in Policy Recommendation 77 that on a single day in July 2006, there were 93 attacks and acts of aggression recorded by official sources. The report goes on to add that, in addition to announced losses and casualties, there have been other losses that have remained unreported due to concerns related to the morale and mental health of the troops.

The Iraqis have matured politically despite the presence of factors that greatly complicate the political process, especially with regard to the policy of uprooting ba’athism and ethnic and sectarian extremism. The competition between Nouri al-Maliki, leader of the State of Law Coalition, and Ayad Allawi, leader of the Iraqi Coalition, has actually helped to further Iraq from elections based on sectarian loyalties.

However, Iran will not give up its efforts to undermine Iraqi politics without a fight, and will once again attempt to create a government loyal to Iran that will serve its regional interests. Evidence of this lies in the editorial by Mohammed Salih Sadqian that was published in the Iranian Jamhuri Islami newspaper on March 13, 2010, under the title “Iraq’s Shi’ites are the Majority.” The editorial mentions that the Shi’ite parties in Iraq have gotten a majority of parliamentary votes in the latest elections, and the author demands that these parties form an alliance between the al-Maliki’s State of Law Coalition and Ammar al-Hakim’s National Coalition in order to get the most benefit possible out of the seats they won in these elections, which would in turn allow the new alliance to select both the presidential head of state and the prime minister, as well as allow them to form the new cabinet and take control the parliament.

Consequently, Iraq and its political process will suffer a setback that will place the nation before even square one. The Iraqi political scene, with its sectarian and ideological blocs, will be realigned once again through the formation of a Shi’ite government by the soon-to-be announced new alliance between al-Maliki and al-Hakim — an alliance the Iranian media began demanding less than a week after the polling booths closed. It is clear both where and how decisions concerning Iraq’s future are being made.