Chilcot inquiry: Invasions of Western democratic values and bitterness of wars


It’s funny matter that wars on over the world usually triggered by Western countries, especially the U.S., who always claim themselves as symbols of freedom, human rights and for goods in the world. You can list out many like Vietnam wars, Korean war and recently in the Middle East like Afganishtan, Lybia and especially Iraq which all have been still immersed in chaos and deadthly violence. And people in those countries, who must have enjoyed happiness and prosperity of democracy and human rights of Western values, now have suffered a worse life than before. This article will bring you a vivid example, Iraq war.
A long-awaited official inquiry delivered a devastating indictment of Britain's decision to invade Iraq Wednesday, July 6th, finding that the war was based on flawed intelligence and had been launched before diplomatic options were exhausted. The findings of the 2.6 million-word Iraq Inquiry -- seven years in the making -- were released following a statement by probe chairman John Chilcot in London.
Sir John Chilcot, the retired British government official who led the inquiry, told a news conference in the British capital that “the U.K. chose to join the invasion of Iraq before the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted. Military action at that time was not a last resort.”
The inquiry said that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein posed "no imminent threat" when the U.S-led invasion was launched in March 2003. It judged the failures in the military operation, from the invasion to the planning of the war with President George W. Bush to the occupation, after which Iraq descended into sectarian violence from which it has yet to emerge.
Sir Chilcot said former British Prime Minister Tony Blair was warned of the risks of regional instability and the rise of terrorism before the invasion of Iraq, but pressed on regardless. Blair has been accused of exaggerating intelligence about Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction in order to build support for the war. Eight months before the invasion, the report revealed that Blair told Bush, “I will be with you whatever. Apperantly, Blair's decision to invade Iraq was influenced by his interest in protecting the UK's relationship with the United States.
The war, which lasted about six weeks, ended Saddam Hussein's 25-year regime in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, figures about Iraqi deaths vary from 90,000 to more than 600,000 and at least 179 British soldiers were killed during the eight-year conflict. The US, which led the intervention in March 2003, lost 4,487 service personnel in the war.
But the aftermath unleashed years of sectarian violence that has killed thousands since then. The worst attack happened last weekend when so-called Islamic State militants - who control swathes of Iraq and Syria - launched a suicide bombing in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, killing more than 250 people.
Families of some of the military personnel killed in Iraq branded the former prime minister a "terrorist", while Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said Sir John's long-awaited report made clear that Parliament was misled and the invasion was "an act of military aggression based on a false pretext".
Jeremy Corbyn, the current Labour leader, has apologised on behalf of Labour for Tony Blair's decision to go to war in Iraq, saying it was a "stain" on the party and country, after the former Prime Minister insisted he stood by his actions.
In response to the scathing criticism, Blair said in a news conference Wednesday that he took full responsibility for the decision to invade Iraq, and acknowledged the failures and mistakes of the mission. While acknowledging "all the problems that came with that decision," Blair said, "what I cannot do and will not do is say I believe we took the wrong decision. "I believe I made the right decision and that the world is better and safer as a result of it," he said.
There have been increasing calls for Blair to face legal action over his role in taking Britain into the deeply unpopular war, the country's most controversial foreign policy decision of the modern era.
But, what’re about Iraq and its people? Who will stand for their justice when others came to their house, destroyed and decided what good or bad for them which must be their rights to decide.
"People don't feel that the Iraq of today is much better than under Saddam Hussein," said CNN's Ben Wedeman, after asking people on the streets of Baghdad what they thought of Wednesday's report. “Many feel that Tony Blair and George Bush should be put on trial for their botched (military) operation."
Hussein was removed and later executed. But the WMD threat was found to have been overblown and the promise to turn a dictatorship into a democracy was never delivered on. Instead, the country descended into years of vicious sectarian conflict, with large areas seized by the terror group ISIS.
More than 250,000 people have died violent deaths since the 2003 invasion, according to the Iraq Body Count project, while millions of Iraqis have been made homeless in the conflict with ISIS.
Kadhim al-Jabbouri, a man who became a symbol of the Iraqi peoples' rejection and hatred of Saddam Hussein.
On 9 April 2003, the American spearhead reached central Baghdad. Hours before they arrived, Kadhim, who was a champion weightlifter, decided to bring down the big bronze statue of Saddam Hussein that stood on a plinth in Firdous Square. Kadhim said his story was told to President George W Bush in the Oval Office. But he now wishes he had left his sledgehammer at home.
Kadhim, like many Iraqis, blames the invaders for starting a chain of events that destroyed the country. He longs for the certainties and stability of Saddam's time.
First, he says, he realised it was not going to be liberation, but occupation. Then he hated the corruption, mismanagement and violence in the new Iraq. Most of all he despises Iraq's new leaders. "Saddam has gone, and we have one thousand Saddams now," he says. "It wasn't like this under Saddam. There was a system. There were ways. We didn't like him, but he was better than those people. Saddam never executed people without a reason. He was as solid as a wall. There was no corruption or looting, it was safe. You could be safe."
Many Iraqis echo that. Saddam's regime was harsh, and it could be murderous. He led the country into a series of disastrous wars and brought crippling international sanctions down on their heads. But with the benefit of 13 years of hindsight, the world that existed before 9 April 2003 seems to be a calmer, more secure place. They have not had a proper day of peace since the old regime fell.
As for democracy, many believe the hopelessly sectarian political system is broken. At least, they say, law and order existed under Saddam.
When asked what he would do if he could meet Tony Blair.
"I would say to him you are a criminal, and I'd spit in his face." Kadhim said.
And what would he say to George Bush?
"I'd say you're criminal too. You killed the children of Iraq. You killed the women and you killed the innocent. I would say the same to Blair. And to the coalition that invaded Iraq. I will say to them you are criminals and you should be brought to justice."
The Americans and Britain, in name of protecting democracy and human rights, removed a hated dictator, and dissolved his army and state. But they had no real plan to rebuild the country they had broken. They improvised - and made matters worse. Jihadists were not in Iraq before the invasion. Shia and Sunni Muslims, whose sectarian civil war started during the occupation, could co-exist. The invaders did not have enough troops to control Iraq. Jihadists poured across open borders. Al-Qaeda established itself here, and eventually was reborn as so-called Islamic State.
       Iraqis have often made matters worse for themselves, but it was mistakes by the US and Britain that pushed Iraq down the road to catastrophe./.
Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 10 ]

John Smith 10/7/16 21:38

The UK failed to appreciate the complexity of governing Iraq, and did not devote enough forces to the task of securing the country in the wake of the invasion.

Gentle Moon 10/7/16 21:40

While the legal basis for the war was "far from satisfactory," the inquiry did not express a view on whether the invasion was legal, arguing that that was a decision for another forum.

LawrenceSamuels 10/7/16 21:41

The report is a "damning indictment" and said that there "must be legal sanctions against Tony Blair and he should no longer be considered fit for any office.

Deck Hero14 10/7/16 21:42

A spokesman for some of the families of the 179 British service personnel and civilians killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2009 said their loved ones had died "unnecessarily and without just cause and purpose".

Pack Cassiopian 10/7/16 21:43

Yes, Western democracy always goes with wars!

Jane smartnic 10/7/16 21:44

Tony Blair is a liar. He lied to the British people. He lied to the international community ... he lied on every level.

Love Peace 10/7/16 21:45

It's only go to Iraq, invade Iraq, destroy the infrastructure, destroy the nationality of all the Iraqis, without a clear post-war plan.

Only Solidar 10/7/16 21:46

Britain joined the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 despite flawed intelligence, "wholly inadequate" planning and no imminent threat from Iraq's then-leader Saddam Hussein.

yobro yobro 10/7/16 21:48

It is a criminal against the human, the U.S. and Britain must be held for responsibility.

MaskOf Zero 10/7/16 21:51

They now want to evade their criminals, look at the inquiry. The inquiry was initially expected to take a year to complete.
Instead it has taken more than seven -- longer than the war itself -- with the final report running to 12 volumes.

Your comments