Prior to the 1980 Gulf War pitting Iraq against its neighbor Iran, United States had a cordial relationship with Iraq leader, Saddam Hussein. The United States watched as the simmering conflict between the two countries broke in to a full brown conflict without much intervention. Iraq attacked Iran on flimsy ground as the whole world watched. United States kept a distance and watched as the event unfolded.
Saddam Hussein was known to be a callous leader, who disregarded human life, right from the start. Besides his tyrannical rule, United States kept him as one of its close allies in the Persian Gulf. One thing is very clear though; the sole intention of the US was to protect the oil fields in the Persian Gulf against regional or internal threat. The oil reserves meant a lot to the growth of the United States economy. Any control of the oil reserves in the Gulf by the Soviet Union, Britain or Japan could have been a big brow to the future growth of US economy.
Over dependence on the Gulf oil by Western Europe and Japan meant that the Gulf region could easily fall in the control of hostile powers. Most of Iraq military hardware came from the Soviet Union; as such it was very easy for Soviet to solidify her relationship with Iraq. The US policy in Iraq was to protect the oil reserves and this could have only been possible through close co-operation with Iraq leader, Saddam Hussein.
The decision to support Saddam Hussein despite his undemocratic leadership style had its shortcomings. The attack on Iran was not justified but due to the cordial relationship and vested interest that the US policy makers had in Iraq through Saddam Hussein, theirs hand were tied. They couldn’t raise a finger to question Saddam Hussein actions. The relation was more important than anything else. The US had to protect the oil reserves at all cost even if it meant overlooking Human Right abuse through tyrannical rule. This is the dilemma facing policy maker in regard to which regime they are to support and be allied to, as the sole factor seem to depend largely with the interests that regime or country have in store for the policy maker.
Currently, the United States policy makers are under a lot of pressure in regards to which nation they should give support and which one they shouldn’t. In fact it’s hard for US to know where to draw the line as the future is very unpredictable. Events of 9/11 left many people with many questions with no immediate answers. Its is a known fact that the chief architect of the 9/11, Osama Bin Laden was a close ally to the United States couple of years back, but the relationship between the Alqaeda Leader got so strained to a point when he turned against the United States. The same case apply to Iraq, since the United States were allied to Saddam, especially because of their interest in oil reserves, they did little or nothing to stop Saddam from invading Iran or develop weapon of mass destruction. Policy makers in the United States must review their foreign policies as a matter of urgency with the sole aim of establishing the long term effect of any relationship with foreign country, especially if the leadership in those countries is in doubt. This way, the US policy makers will be in apposition to chat the best way forward for a prosperous and safe America.
Reference
Antonia Juhasz (2006) The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a time, Regan Publishers, New York.
Sandra Mackey (2003) The Reckoning and the Legacy of Saddam Hussein, Norton publishers, New York.
Stanley Allen Renshon (1993) The Political Psychology of the Gulf war: Leaders, Public, and the process, University of Pittsburgh Publishers, United States.