Gulf War
The Gulf War (1990–91), also known as the First Gulf War (also Iraq-Kuwait War or First Iraq War), was a conflict following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, with a coalition with forces from 35 countries (almost all NATO) led by the United States. Iraq was forced to evacuate Kuwait and after pitched battles in the desert was defeated, resulting in an armistice.
History
The U.S. had a complex relationship with Iraq during the 1980s, supporting Saddam against Iran with intelligence, loans, and dual-use technology. Some argue this emboldened Saddam, creating a perception of U.S. tolerance for his regional ambitions. The U.S. removed Iraq from its terrorism sponsor list in 1982 to facilitate aid during the Iran-Iraq War. U.S. support was pragmatic, aimed at countering Iran. By 1990, U.S.-Iraq relations were cooling due to Iraq’s threats against neighbors.
The Persian Gulf War (2 August 1990 to 28 February 1991), commonly referred to as the Gulf War, and also known as the First Gulf War, the Second Gulf War, by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein as The Mother of all Battles, and commonly as Desert Storm for the military response, was the final conflict, which was initiated with United Nations authorization, by a coalition force from 34 nations against Iraq, with the expressed purpose of expelling Iraqi forces from Kuwait after its invasion and annexation on 2 August 1990.
Secret documents only released in 2014 reveal something startling: Just months before the war, Canadian-born US ambassador April Catherine Glaspie visited Iraq and told Hussein that he can invade Kuwait and the USA would allow him to. The USA basically encouraged him to invade and promised no intervention. Immediately after invading, they pretended like the conversation never took place.
- Some narratives claim the U.S. deliberately lured Saddam into invading to justify military intervention and secure regional dominance. These rely on Glaspie’s meeting and U.S. oil interests but lack concrete evidence.Evidence: No declassified documents or credible testimony confirm a U.S. plot to “invite” the invasion. The rapid U.S.-led response, including UN sanctions and coalition-building, contradicts claims of premeditated entrapment. Critics of this theory argue that U.S. miscalculations or mixed signals (e.g., Glaspie’s ambiguous wording) were diplomatic errors, not deliberate invitations.
The invasion of Kuwait by Iraqi troops that began 2 August 1990 was met with international condemnation, and brought both immediate economic sanctions against Iraq by members of the UN Security Council. U.S. President George H. W. Bush deployed American forces to Saudi Arabia and urged other countries to send their own forces to the scene. An array of nations joined the Coalition of the Gulf War. The great majority of the military forces in the coalition were from the United States, with Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom and Egypt as leading contributors, in that order. Around US$40 billion of the US$60 billion cost was paid by Saudi Arabia.
The initial conflict to expel Iraqi troops from Kuwait began with an aerial bombardment on 17 January 1991. This was followed by a ground assault on 23 February. This was a decisive victory for the coalition forces, who liberated Kuwait and advanced into Iraqi territory. The coalition ceased their advance, and declared a cease-fire 100 hours after the ground campaign started. Aerial and ground combat was confined to Iraq, Kuwait, and areas on the border of Saudi Arabia. However, Iraq launched missiles against coalition military targets in Saudi Arabia.
Criticism
Critics argue the Gulf War was unjust or problematic for several reasons:
- Geopolitical and Economic Motives: Many believe the war was driven by U.S. interests in securing oil supplies and maintaining influence in the Middle East, rather than purely defending Kuwait’s sovereignty. The U.S. had strategic alliances with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, key oil-producing nations, and sought to protect these relationships against Iraq’s ambitions.
- Evidence: The U.S. rapidly mobilized a coalition under Operation Desert Shield to protect Saudi Arabia and then launched Operation Desert Storm to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Critics argue this urgency reflected oil-driven priorities, as Kuwait’s oil fields were vital to global markets.
- Counterpoint: Supporters argue the war was justified under international law, as Iraq’s invasion violated Kuwait’s sovereignty, and UN Security Council Resolution 678 authorized force to restore it.
- Human Cost and Collateral Damage: The war caused significant civilian casualties and environmental damage. The bombing campaign, including strikes on infrastructure like power plants and water facilities, led to long-term suffering for Iraqi civilians, exacerbated by post-war sanctions.
- Evidence: Estimates suggest tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians died due to direct and indirect effects of the war, with infrastructure destruction contributing to health crises. The 1991 bombing of the Al-Amiriyah shelter killed over 400 civilians, a widely criticized incident.
- Counterpoint: Coalition forces argued they minimized civilian harm and targeted military infrastructure, but “dual-use” targets (e.g., bridges) inevitably affected civilians.
- Long-Term Consequences: Critics argue the war set a precedent for U.S. military overreach in the Middle East, destabilizing the region. The decision to leave Saddam in power led to ongoing tensions, sanctions, and eventually the 2003 Iraq War.
- Evidence: Post-war Iraq faced economic collapse under UN sanctions, contributing to widespread poverty and resentment, which fueled extremism and later conflicts.
- Counterpoint: Supporters claim the war achieved its immediate goal—liberating Kuwait—and maintaining Saddam’s regime avoided deeper regional chaos at the time.
- Moral Hypocrisy: Some critics point to U.S. support for authoritarian regimes (e.g., Kuwait’s monarchy) while condemning Iraq’s actions, suggesting selective enforcement of international norms.
- Evidence: The U.S. had previously supported Saddam during the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), providing intelligence and economic aid, which critics argue undermines claims of moral consistency.
- Counterpoint: Defenders argue that geopolitical alliances shift based on strategic needs, and Iraq’s aggression in 1990 necessitated a response, regardless of prior U.S. policies.
The claim that the U.S. invited or greenlit Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait stems from a controversial pre-war diplomatic exchange but lacks definitive evidence of explicit encouragement.The Glaspie Meeting: On July 25, 1990, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein. According to Iraqi transcripts, Glaspie said the U.S. had “no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” Critics interpret this as a signal that the U.S. would not intervene if Iraq invaded.
At the time, Iraq was threatening Kuwait over border disputes, oil production quotas, and debts from the Iran-Iraq War. Glaspie’s statement was meant to convey U.S. neutrality in intra-Arab disputes, not necessarily an endorsement of military action. Declassified U.S. cables show Glaspie also warned Saddam that disputes should be resolved peacefully, but her language was diplomatic and did not explicitly threaten U.S. intervention. Saddam may have misinterpreted this as tacit approval. U.S. officials, including Glaspie, later denied giving any “green light.” The Bush administration’s swift condemnation of the invasion (August 2, 1990) and rapid coalition-building suggest no intent to invite aggression.
