Iraq

The most crucial idea necessary to an understanding of Iraq’s foreign policy is the fact that Iraq as a nation is inseparable from the person of Saddam Hussein. While many nations have had exceptionally charismatic or dynamic leaders who dominated their respective political systems, very few countries have leaders who actually become the political system. On paper, Iraq has a constitution which resembles a representative government - they have a legislative body and they hold elections. However, since he first became a factor in Iraqi politics in the late 1950’s at the heart of the turmoil which rocked Iraq at the time, Hussein has ruthlessly grappled his way to the top, consolidating power through policies of terror while eliminating those who opposed him. Understanding Iraqi foreign policy means understanding the goals and attitudes of Saddam Hussein.

Since he became president of Iraq in 1979, Hussein’s primary focus has been to remain in power and enhance his own personal prestige. This means that he must handle a number of very complicated domestic ethnic and religious problems in addition to the complexities created by being part of a volatile region with its own religious and ethnic problems. To further compound the issue, since 1991 Iraq has been at odds with much of the world based upon its role in the invasion of Kuwait, lack of cooperation with UN weapons inspectors and related complications. As a result, Saddam Hussein must maintain a stranglehold on his people internally so that his somewhat precarious international position is not threatened. He wants to continue his development of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons to strengthen Iraq’s position as an international actor. He would like to reassert Iraq as a leader in the Arab world, through a continued aggressive stance towards the United States, the west and Israel. In order to continue the accumulation of personal wealth and in the interests of internal stability, Hussein needs to get Iraqi oil production back to its pre-war levels; this almost requires that UN sanctions be lifted. The Iraqi economy and state of modernization will never improve without open trade. The current shambles of an economy in IRaq does not hurt Hussein personally, as what limited wealth remains in the country is channeled directly to him, but as time goes by and the situation does not improve, the odds of a coup being staged grow higher. For this reason, and of course in the interests of national and Arab pride, Hussein would like to see the country begin to move forward economically once again. In order for sanctions to be lifted though, Hussein must either cooperate with UN inspectors and the hated “west” (at least outwardly although weapons systems can still be hidden) or he must rely on pressure from other nation-states to lift the sanctions. This leads to an interesting balancing act - Hussein must try to present a bold front even while he attempts to convince other world actors to support his cause. Since the cease-fire, Hussein has worked to eliminate sanctions in order to allow for his own power recovery. He wants to restore his shattered military, rebuild manufacturing, and get revenge on those nations, particularly the United States, which stood against him in the Gulf War. His efforts to do this have involved capitalizing on divisions in the international community, lobbying for support in the Arab/Islamic world and attempting to win over friendly or neutral states with economic advantages (ie cheap oil). In short, Saddam Hussein wants to remain in power. Although this is a relatively simple concept, it requires a host of different political maneuverings, similar to those of nations which are not controlled by dictators. The difference between the two cases lies in the underlying motivations and mechanisms used to support those motivations.

The personal history of Saddam Hussein as well as the historical background of his country helps to both explain and illustrate the complications of modern-day Iraq. Hussein was born in 1937, a part of the Sunni lower class. (The Sunnis, along with the Shiites, are one of the two major categorizations of Muslims.) In present-day Iraq, the Sunnis form a minority of the population yet dominate the government.) Hussein grew up poor, with an abusive step-father, and his low grades eventually kept him out of the military academy. This would become a blight of honor, as virtually all of the Arab leaders during this time had military backgrounds, but in 1976, he would declare himself a lieutenant general, and in 1979 after becoming president, he promoted himself to field marshal. Hussein did became active in politics at an early stage in his life, and in 1958 he was part of a Baath hit squad which brutally assassinated the current head of the Iraqi government and then paraded his corpse on national television. The Baath party had its origins in Syria, and was created as a revolutionary party to represent the people through a concentration of leadership in the hands of an enlightened minority. After their first attempt at a revolutionary coup in Iraq failed, Hussein and other Baath leaders fled to Egypt. While in Cairo, Hussein went to law school and involved himself in the underside of Arab politics. In a telling 1990 interview with the New York Times, the owner of a Cairo café frequented by Hussein said, “He was what we call a troublemaker. He would fight for any reason…We wanted to bar him from coming here, but the police said he was protected by Nasser.”

In 1963, Hussein returned to Iraq as part of another attempted coup. This also failed, but in 1968, a decade after the first assassination, the Baaths seized power again, and this time they were successful. As a group of dedicated idealogues, they immediately began eliminating those who would oppose them. A young Hussein was the head of the internal security machine, in charge of the executions and torture of political enemies including suspected communists, pro-Syrians, Shiites and Kurds. This background as an intelligence/security officer would remain with him. The organization of the Iraqi Baath party was reminiscent of communism under Stalin. Each regional command station had units and cells, preaching Arab unity, nationalism, socialism, and Arab spiritual revival while keeping a very focused watch for any hints of subversion. Hussein was always intensely involved with such security measures, and in 1979, as the vice president he discovered a plot among the revolutionary command council. Twenty-one of its members were executed and Hussein became the President of Iraq, with his close relatives being named to key cabinet and government positions. In a pattern which has continued to the present day, Hussein began to make frequent public outings to bolster his image, and solidify feelings of national unity and central authority. Policies of fear became his most effective way of solidifying his base of power. The Baath party is still in power in Iraq, and although other parties exist on paper, in effect Iraq has a one-party dominant system. Everyday Iraqi people have no political power whatsoever and public opinion is not a dominant force in Iraqi politics.

As a tool for controlling his people internally, Hussein has had no qualms about using violence. In fact, this can be considered an important aspect of domestic policy. The Iraqi government “arranges” for the disappearance or accidents of political enemies, and extremely harsh penalties including execution, amputations and branding are applied to many crimes, even petty theft. Insulting Saddam Hussein in public merits the death penalty and Iraqi doctors are forced to perform “judicial” amputations and brandings or risk the same punishment themselves. Bounties are offered by the government for the assassination of UN or other international personnel. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, assassination attempts were planned against both George Bush and the emir of Kuwait. Iraqi society is undercut by a network of spies and informers, and it is a telling statement that nearly all Iraqi refugees from two decades of conflict have stayed abroad.

However, Iraq is a complicated nation, torn on many sides by intertwined domestic and international groups and issues, all of which must be controlled if Hussein is to remain in power. While Hussein does not answer to the Iraqi people directly, he does have to live up to the expectations of Arab society in both his own country and the Arab community abroad. This is an interesting paradox as there are certain elements of a role to fulfill, but at least for Hussein, no direct consequence if he does not. Iraq is the eastern most front of the Arab world, bordering Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia on the west, but also touching Iran and Turkey to the east, two very non-Arab nations. In 1974, Iraq was able to bolster its standing in the Arab world as it stood strong against Iran when tensions flared between the two nations over issues of minority and oil rights. An eventual compromise was worked out between the two nations as a result of the fear of aligned superpower involvement (US for Iran or USSR for Iraq). However, this underscores the fact that Arab nationalism is a critical issue in the Middle East, and has been at the root of much of the conflict there. Very strong pro-Arab feelings dominate the region, and at times, attempts have been made to create a sort of Arab commonwealth state, with many of the visible nation-state boundaries being dissolved in favor of overall Arab unity. This fact is compounded by the fact that the majority of Arabs share a common religion - Islam - whose tenets make it a form of social identity which dominates daily life and is a very real political entity. As a religious and ethnic body, a fierce system of honor, dignity, pride and unswerving loyalty are very important elements of Arab life. The Arab world is based on an identity as a people, and so the leader is a social, cultural, historical leader of an entire group. By placing himself at the forefront of Iraq, Hussein was also asserting himself as a potential leader of the entire Arab world.

In the 1970’s as it began to modernize, aided by vast influxes of oil money, Iraq started to become a stronger voice in the Arab community, considering itself an emerging leader to it’s own pride and others’ unease. The presence of Israel, a distinct ethnic and religious nation, and its periodic outbreaks with the Arab states added an increased level of volatility to the situation, thrusting Iraq to the front of the Arab coalition which stood united against the shock of Anwar Sadat’s defection to the side of the west after Egypt signed the Camp David accords with Israel. Egypt had long been considered the international representative of the Arab world, but the Camp David accords led to a sense of unease among the Arab community and a willingness to look more openly on Iraq’s growing stature and position.

In 1979 this growing position was expanded as the Shiite Revolution in Iran and the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini caused many Arab nations to fear a spread of the violence and upheaval which was rocking Iran, especially as the Ayatollah was particularly vociferous in his denunciations of Arab nationalism. Hussein immediately used the situation to make a show of strength for the sake of his standing within Iraq as well as his position in the rest of the Arab world which was not sure exactly how to handle the situation. In 1979 Hussein broke diplomatic relations with Iran and in 1980 he began the systematic execution of Iraqi Shiites, saying in an appeal to Iraqi and Arab nationalism, “Iraq is once again to assume its leading Arab role. Iraq is once again to serve the Arab nation and defend honor, dignity and sovreignty.” Shortly thereafter, Iraq invaded Iran, beginning what was to be a long and bloody eight year war. One by one the other Arab nations fell in behind Iraq, with the exception of Syria which sided with Iran because of a deep-seated distrust of Iraq. Syria and Iraq had been at odds since 1969 and the success of the Iraqi Baath party, due to personal conflicts between Hussein and Hafiz al-Assad as well as ideological problems with the fact that two distinct geographical centers were competing to be the center of Baath power. They frequently quarreled over economic and water issues, as well as Arab affairs and the rapid growth of Iraqi influence within the Arab community. However, it is a testimony to the power of Arab nationalism that even though other Arab nations also distrusted Iraq and Hussein to a certain extent, only Syria broke ranks and sided with Iran.

By the end of 1988, the war had dragged on for eight years, and Iraq had been reduced from a mid-level, growing country to a debtor nation surviving off of the charity of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, which pumped vast sums of money into Iraq again as a result of Arab nationalism. Iraq’s economy had been severely damaged since 1984, yet Hussein refused to call off the war because of personal and national pride. Assassination attempts had been made on his life, and the Ayatollah had publicly stated that he would not rest until Hussein was removed from power. Hussein began an aggressive domestic campaign to bolster his image, comparing himself to Nebuchadnezzer, the ancient king of the Babylonians, while continuing a war which was depleting his country of resources, cash, and people. In 1986, other Arab nations were drawn into the conflict as Iran attacked them, and the United States was even briefly involved. However, despite the massive damage wrought to his country, its infrastructure, and its overall economy, when a cease-fire was finally declared in 1988, Hussein proclaimed himself the champion of Arab liberty, the architect of a socialist Iraq, and the defender of Arab dignity against the aristocratic elites.

Unfortunately, the war left Iraq with debts of $80 billion, mostly owed to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the USSR, as well as a greatly reduced ability to distribute oil. In 1990, Hussein demanded a forgiveness of all debt, as well as payments of $10 billion from each Arab member of OPEC, claiming that Iraq had fought for the good of the entire Arab community. When Kuwait refused, Hussein claimed that Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil along their common border and demanded additional compensation. Kuwait again refused, and Iraqi troop mobilization began. Kuwait also refused to cut its own oil production, in an Iraqi attempt to drive up prices. Towards the end of 1990, Iraq invaded and swiftly conquered Kuwait.

Hussein represented himself as redressing imperialist wrongs and slights against Arab honor by invading Kuwait. He claimed to be attacking the al-Sabah ruling family of Kuwait and attempted to appeal to social schisms in the Arab world, highlighted by the inequity of wealth in some of the oil-producing states, especially the monarchies. Hussein thought that if he could successfully take-over Kuwait with its ties to the west and pseudo-imperialistic social order, he could present himself as an Arab hero. In reality, he shattered Arab unity. By moving in an unprecedented attack against a fellow Arab nation, he triggered the vast majority of the Arab nations, with the exceptions of Jordan, Yemen and the PLO to side against him, with the west. However, even after the crushing defeat of Iraqi forces by a UN/US led coalition, as well as the crippling economic sanctions which have been in place since the cease fire in 1991, Hussein will not back down. He insists that he is defending Arab honor by refusing to give into the imperialistic aggression of the west. In some ways, this approach is working. By exploiting the hardships of the sanctions in the lives of the Iraqi people, Hussein is making an effective appeal to Arab unity. After the many defeats suffered at the hands of Israel, Hussein remains the only leader who has attacked Israel without retaliation (SCUD missile attacks during the Persian Gulf War) as well as being one of the few leaders to stand up to western powers. After a decade of sanctions, Arab support of the position of the west is growing thin, and Hussein’s self presentation as a hero against both Israel and the superpowers is keeping him in power, even though he technically “lost” the gulf war. The other Arab states may not ‘like’ Hussein, but he is, like them, an Arab, and he insists that by standing up to the UN and the United States, he is standing up for Arab pride and Arab dignity. This is a strong appeal given the history of interference and colonialism in the affairs of the Middle East, as well as the ethnic and religious values of most Arabs. The uncertainty in the Middle East regarding Iraq’s position is a reflection of the conflict between nationalism and ideology. Iraq has swung between an intensely pro-Arab and equally intense pro-Iraqi stance, attempting to hold to both positions, even when they become mutually exclusive, as seen in the invasion of Kuwait, a fellow Arab state. One of the most interesting aspect of Iraq’s developing foreign policy is the fact that it has invaded two of its neighbors in pursuit of its goals and used military force to achieve regional hegemony. Aggression has been used to influence oil policies, even with other Arab nations, and overall Iraqi behavior on the international scene has been in support of Hussein’s ambitions.

Even with the potential religious unity found in the Middle East and Iraq in particular, as previously mentioned, there are two major categorizations of Muslims, the Shiites and the Sunnis. Conflict between the two groups has played a role in the domestic stability of Iraq. This in turn has influenced Iraqi foreign policy. Iraqi violence against the Shiites began in 1980, and has continued to the present day. Shiite muslims are one of several groups who have been systematically persecuted, relocated and executed by the Iraqi government. Many Shiites died during the Gulf War as Iraqi troops used the conflict as an excuse for internal violence, and those which remain in the country today are kept out of the political system thus creating an anti-Hussein power vacuum in Southern Iraq. In addition, in the turmoil surrounding the coalition victories during the Gulf War, the majority Sunni army could have turned against Hussein in revolt. However, they did not, and a factor in this decision may have been the fact that in surrendering Hussein’s control of Iraq, they would have potentially placed themselves under Shiite leadership, considered to be the greater of two evils.

In addition to religious conflicts, ethnic conflicts also play a major role in Iraqi internal stability and international behavior. The Kurds, a people in northern Iraq, are an ethnic group distinct from the Arabs, with their own language, found across country borders from Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. They were promised an independent Kurdistan during the imperialistic era, but this goal was never realized and so Kurdish nationalism remains a problem for those nations with a sizeable Kurdish population. Beginning in 1970, approximately 40-50% of Iraq’s oil has come from the northern regions inhabited by Kurds. The central government feared that this part of Iraq would secede, taking their oil with them, and so in 1974, government troops attacked the Kurds in what would become an ongoing struggle. Iran used this hostility to flame tensions between itself and Iraq by providing money and arms support to Kurdish rebels. During the Gulf war Iraqi and Kuwaiti Kurds were targeted for violence, and since that time, an internal embargo against Kurds has been in place in Iraq. Even attempts to smuggle oil out of Iraq through Turkey against UN sanctions have been threatened by Turkey’s fear of Kurdish instability as Iraqi Kurds have fled into Turkey against the persecution of their native country. Since the Gulf War, the Iraqi military has been used in systematic attempts to eliminate the Kurds of Iraq. Extensive chemical weaponry has been employed against Kurdish villages, and eyewitnesses who escaped the destruction of these areas report of atrocities similar to those committed against the Jews by the Nazi’s. Whole villages of Kurds are rounded up, taken to already-dug pits in the ground, forced to climb in, and then shot to death. The Kurdish issue will continue to be a problem for Saddam Hussein as he must deal not only with an internal struggle, but also with an ethnic struggle which places him at odds with neighboring countries.

In political terms, Hussein is in almost complete control of the government. He has an extensive network of spies and informers, led by his son Uday, reporting to him, and he has the power to overthrow the Iraqi constitution without judicial involvement. He is the President, Prime Minister, Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, Secretary General of the Baath party, and the point of ultimate loyalty for the Republican Guards, Iraq’s elite military force. The Iraqi political system has been almost completely reconstructed to support Hussein, and he uses this power given domestically to pursue an aggressive agenda abroad. There are a string of very complex domestic issues with which Hussein must grapple (previously mentioned, and developed further later), but he does have the freedom to deal with them using violence and terror.

In a social sense, two decades of war and sanctions have had an adverse effect on Iraq. There has been a marked rise in corruption and bribery in government as resources become scarcer. There is an indifference towards politics among the public sector, perhaps a result of the frequent purges within the Hussein regime, as anyone suspected of sedition or treason is executed. Two coup, or suspected coup attempts, in 1990 and 1996 led to the execution of many ranking members of Hussein’s staff, including family members. A plethora of social problems including public sector health employees leaving for other more lucrative positions, theft, prostitution, begging, university professors leaving positions, a decline in overall health services, pollution of water supplies, increasing infant mortality, and malnutrition have plagued Iraq, and are growing worse as sanctions continue. In addition, direct government action has led to internal draining of inhabited marsh areas, natural habitat loss threatening wildlife populations, a reduction in supplies of potable water, soil degredation, erosion, destertification, and air and water pollution. These conditions serve to highlight the fact that in effect, Iraq is a closed political system in which public opinion does not count for anything. The government is incompetent to deal with issues affecting daily life, and without massive oil production, life in Iraq for the average person is one of misery. Over a million people have died since the start of UN sanctions.

However, despite Iraqi claims that this tragedy is due to the sanctions, evidence indicates that it is more a function of the incompetence of the Iraqi government and the personal whims of Saddam Hussein. Sanctions have allowed as much food as is needed to feed the population to be imported, but Iraq has been exporting agricultural products including rice for hard currency, even as the people starve. Oil-for-food programs which bring in much needed infant and prenatal supplies are being thwarted as baby milk, powder, and bottles are being found in outside markets in the Persian Gulf, again for the sake of hard currency. This money is going directly to the private coffers of Saddam Hussein as his personal wealth is currently estimated to exceed $6 billion. Hussein has built 48 new palaces for himself since the Gulf War, many with exotic fountains even as Iraq suffers from a drought, marble statues, monuments to himself and expensive cars for himself and his top officials. Two billion dollars have been spent on such palaces in the last ten years, and large amounts of imported whiskey, marble, crystal and gold have also been imported. Top officials receive extra monthly food rations and the money coming into Iraq for medical needs is spent on expensive, upper-end medical equipment used to cater to the needs of the upper echelon of Hussein’s ranks, instead of going to simple things like antibiotics which would go far towards saving the lives of many Iraqi children. Hussein claims he needs more money for oil transportation, yet he apparently has the capabilities to move missiles around, hiding them from weapons inspectors. UNICEF reports blame Iraqi mismanagement for the deaths of so many people, as aid programs managed in the north by outside forces have been very successful at reversing death rates, while government controlled southern regions continue to suffer.

In an economic sense, Iraq is also in trouble. Per capita income and GDP have been steadily dropping since 1978 as a result of two wars and ongoing sanctions which forbid Iraq from openly selling oil on the world market. The progress and modernization made in the 1970’s has been virtually eliminated, and the majority of Iraqi citizens struggle to survive. Iraq’s economy is over 95% dependent on oil, and UN sanctions prohibit it from selling any more than it needs for humanitarian purposes (estimated to be $5billion every six months). As a result, Iraq’s oil production capabilities dropped as low as ½ of pre-war levels. Iraq claims that its oil production is still at very low levels, although international consensus based upon oil smuggling places current oil production at just below pre-war levels.

Without the international complications, Iraq has the potential to be a very wealthy nation. It’s oil reserves are the second largest in the world, behind only that of Saudi Arabia. In addition, Iraq has plentiful natural gas, phosphates and sulfur deposits. However, Iraq’s economy is not diversified and it lacks the machinery to be considered an industrialized nation. Only 12% of its geographic land mass is arable; 75% of Iraq is classified as desert, making water a very valuable commodity. In the destruction of Shiite lives and property in Southern Iraq, many of Iraq’s valuable marshlands have also been destroyed. As Iraq is currently in the midst of a severe draught, most farmers, certainly a minority in Iraq to begin with, have been told not to plant crops. This only increases Iraq’s dependence upon the outside world for agricultural and manufactured products.

However, despite the economic unsoundness of an undiversified economy, the unavoidable fact that Iraq controls a huge amount of the world’s remaining petroleum deposits does give Saddam Hussein some flexibility. The world oil market would be more stable if Iraq’s oil wells were open for legal production and current estimates indicate that by 2010, the world will need Iraq oil to avoid an energy crisis. Hussein has used this situation to his advantage by illegally exporting oil through Turkey and other neighboring countries. While member countries supporting sanctions are fully aware of what Iraq is doing, there is a certain incentive to ignore the situation because it can lead to lower oil prices. In addition, in meetings of the UN, Iraq has lobbied heavily for increases in its allowable oil exports. This has been successful, as over the last decade, the limits on Iraq’s oil production have been steadily increased. There have also been expansions on the types of goods which Iraq has been allowed to import. Iraqi arguments that manufactured parts are necessary to maintain functional oil wells have allowed them to legally import goods which were previously banned because of their potential application in weapons programs. While there is no concrete evidence that these parts are being used in weapons development, it is no secret that Iraq is vitally interested in such systems, and so the possibility certainly exists. Oil plays a vital role in Saddam Hussein’s goals because it provides the financial backing for his endeavors as well as giving him leverage in the international community.

In addition to economic capabilities, Hussein also has a range of military strength to help him pursue his goals. Prior to the Gulf War, Iraq had one of the largest standing armies in the world. A large amount of this network was destroyed by coalition forces, but elements of it still remain. The Iraqi military has become a military ideological force, almost more like a political unit functioning as an army. In particular, nuclear/biological/chemical development programs, or even the threat of their existence can be a powerful bargaining tool. Much of the current controversy with Iraq and the west stems from the unwillingness of the Iraqi’s to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors. One of the conditions of the 1991 cease-fire was that Iraq would destroy its weapons of mass destruction (WMD), provide documentation of such activities, and allow UN inspectors to monitor the situation. After manipulating and skirting around this agreement for years, in 1998 Iraq completely stopped cooperating with UN inspectors and refused to allow them into the country. This has raised questions concerning the exact state of Iraq’s weapons capabilities. Saddam Hussein would like to possess functional WMD, and there is ample evidence that he has pursued actions to attain that goal. Since UN forces never occupied Iraq during the Gulf War and accurate inspections have not been allowed since, there is no clear-cut evidence as to the specific nature of Iraq’s weaponry. However, the use of chemical weapons against internal dissident groups indicates that at least some level of expertise has been achieved with such agents. Tons of equipment and precursor chemicals required for agent VX, sarin and mustard gas production were found and destroyed by UN inspectors before they were completely shut out. The interesting fact is that large scale chemical production was never discovered, indicating either that the Iraqi program had not yet progressed to that level (but what about attacks against the Kurds?) or that the production site was effectively hidden from inspectors. In terms of nuclear weapons, there was a significant Iraqi investment prior to the Gulf War for nuclear weapons and reactor components. Since none of this has ever been found either, it is very possible that Iraq lacks only fissile material to possess nuclear technology. There is no reliable indicator of the state of Iraq’s biological warfare capabilities since Hussein’s publicity announcements cannot be trusted, but since Iraq has a very clear history of denying things which are then found by inspectors or verified by an outside source, there is no way to rule out biological weapons capabilities.

Perhaps the most chilling accounts of Iraq’s weapons programs are those given by Hussein’s now dead son-in-law, Hussein Kamil. When Kamil escaped to Jordan in 1996 he stated that most of Iraq’s weapons had survived the Gulf war and had been concealed from the UN. He acknowledged the existence of over 2000 gallons of anthrax which had not been eliminated to his knowledge. To support his claims, in the spring of 1996, UN inspectors discovered that Iraq had planted hundreds of thousands of acres of castor beans, the source of the deadly toxin ricin, even as the Iraqi people starve. Kamil claims that Iraq has produced 3.9 tons of the chemical agent VX, which although it claims to have destroyed these chemicals, it cannot document that fact. In addition, the production sites for such chemicals are still standing and could become operation with the still- remaining tons of chemical precursors. Since Iraq cannot document the destruction of its SCUD missiles either, Kamil suspected that there were still dozens of such missiles which could be used for the delivery of biological or chemical agents. In the last few years, US customs officials in Miami discovered a plot to smuggle surplus US military helicopters into Iraq through Canada and the Philippines. These helicopters were the same kind as were used in the Gulf War and would be ideal as a delivery system for aerosolized weapons. In addition, Kamil reported that Iraq is developing spraying devices for airplanes to be used as a delivery system. Kamil claims that Iraq lacks only fissile material to have nuclear technology, and current estimates indicate that if Russia were to sell Iraq weapons-grade plutonium or uranium, Iraq could have a nuclear bomb in less than a year. Kamil and another Hussein son-in-law escaped to Jordan along with their respective wives (Saddam’s daughters) and families, but returned two weeks later, at Hussein’s request. The two men were promptly executed.
Iraq’s relationship with other Arab nations was severely strained as a result of his aggression towards Kuwait. However, after a decade of sanctions, things are beginning to change. Iraqi oil is or has been smuggled out of Russia, Iran, Syria, Turkey and Jordan. Jordan helped Iraq during the war with Iran and was pro-Iraq during the Gulf War, but after the war the relationships was more strained. Iraq owed Jordan over a billion dollars and the Jordanians resented the instability Iraq brought to the region. However, at the same time, Jordan gets cheap Iraqi oil and there is extensive Iraqi support among Jordan’s Palestinians who identify with the Iraqis as victims of the West. In recent times, communications between the two nations have been well established and tensions have eased. Perhaps most telling, Jordan and Iraq plan to reestablish trading patterns and an Iraq-Jordan oil pipeline is to be reopened.

Syria and Iraq have had problems for years, as mentioned previously. There is a long history between the two nations of covert support for terrorist groups targeting the opposite nation as Syria sided with Iran during the Iran-Iraq war and Iraq supported anti-Syrian forces in Lebanon. However, since 1996 relations with Syria have thawed as Syria has pushed for a renewed relationship in light of its troubles with Israel. Unlike Iraq which does not share a border with Israel, Syria has lost territory to Israel since its inception in 1948, and it needs allies in the area in consideration of a potential Israel-Turkey treaty. In the last 6 months, plans have been made to reopen a rail line between Syria and Iraq, and with the death of Hafiz al-Assad, more and more prospective ties have been made between the two nations. The Syrian Minister of Industry met with officials in Iraq to discuss Arab economic integration and to support trade between themselves.

The relationship between Iran and Iraq remains rocky. Since the war between the two countries, neither side has been friendly towards the other. Iraq claims that Iran has been behind recent missiles launched into Baghdad, and Iran has legal evidence that Iraq has been supporting the mojahedin-e khalq, a terrorist group operating against the Islamic fundamentalists in control of Iran. German intelligence has found evidence of a missile factory in northern Iraq, and this may indicate a possible escalation of the cease-fire with Iran into a situation of more active conflict. Even 12 years after the original cease-fire, Iran and Iraq are still disputing border demarcations and waterway access.

Iraq and Israel have had a rather odd relationship. Like all of the other Arab nations, Iraq does not support Israel’s existence, and has even gone so far as to lob unprovoked SCUD missiles into Israeli cities. However, Iraq does not share a border with Israel, and so it is not as intensely involved with the tricky balance which Syria, Egypt and Jordan find themselves struggling to maintain. Although the current turmoil in the Middle East will probably disrupt things once again, there was consideration of the possibility of Iraq and Israel opening a joint pipeline. Iraq would take Palestinian refugees in exchange for Israel lobbying in the UN for the lifting of sanctions against Iraq. Both sides vigorously deny this, but it is an interesting thought nonetheless.

Turkey has a mixed relationship with Iraq. As a non-Arab neighbor, ethnic conflict has sometimes been an issue. In addition, Turkey has a sizeable Kurdish population, and has been the object of wave upon wave of Kurds fleeing Iraq across its northern border. The two nations have tried to avoid antagonizing each other though, as they are important trading partners. In fact, much of the oil Iraq has been smuggling out against UN sanctions has been smuggled through Turkey. However, Iraq fears Turkish ambitions, particularly in the UN and this trade dependence can be a source of worry. Recently, relations between the two nations seem to be improving as Turkey has planned to upgrade its diplomatic relationship to the ambassadorial level in Iraq.

Iraq does not get along well with either Saudi Arabia or Kuwait because of their support of US/western forces in the Gulf War. Saddam considers both nations to be traitors, and has expressed such opinions vocally for the last ten years. Even with other traditional enemies such as Syria opening new relations, there have been no moves to reconcile with either the Saudis or Kuwaitis. In fact, in recent publications, Hussein has denounced both nations and labeled their actions a crime against Iraq.

Egypt and Iraq are neither solid friends nor enemies. Egypt supports Iraq in the sense that it is an Arab nation, and has great sympathy for the Iraqi people who suffer under sanctions. Egyptian leaders do not necessarily trust Hussein or a renewed Iraqi presence in international or Arab affairs, but they do resent what they consider unnecessary US meddling in the region through the support of UN sanctions. Egypt supports the Iraqi people if not Saddam Hussein. One interesting thing to keep in mind is the fact that Hussein does consider Iraq to be in competition with Egypt for representation of the Arab world abroad. This may be a factor in upcoming events.

Russia is currently an important ally for Iraq on the international scene. The old Soviet Union supported Iraq in the Middle East, and Russia has continued this involvement. Prior to the Gulf War, Russia was the source of much of Iraq’s international arms’ trades as well as being a major trading partner. This has continued, with Iraqi exports going to Russia and Russian goods being imported into Iraq. In addition, there is evidence that Russia may be involved with building factories in northern Iraq for missile development. Russia has fairly extensive commercial investments in Iraq and since Iraq owes the Russian government billions of dollars, the Russians have an interest in seeing the sanctions against Iraq removed. They have indeed been supportive of this in both the General Assembly and Security Council of the UN. The Russian emergencies Ministry is ready to cooperate with Iraq in dealing with the sanctions, and Prime Minister Putin recently met with the Iraqi prime minister. Putin supposedly told the Iraqi’s, “not to give into Western blackmail,” said that their, “eternal friendship should cooperate in every sphere” and encouraged Iraq not to allow Iraqi generals and ranking politicians to be tried on war crimes charges stemming from their attack against Kuwait and the Kurds during the Gulf War. Russian tankers have been known to smuggle oil out of Iraq and Russian oil companies recently signed a 23 year deal to redo Iraqi oil fields. Russian planes have landed in Baghdad and Russian airlines are working on establishing an active route. This step is important for the Russian as well as Iraqi economy.

The French are also an important Iraqi “ally,” particularly since they are a link to the Western world. France, along with Russia, is also an Iraqi trading partner, and French oil companies are eager to get involved with Iraqi oil fields as recent agreements have been worked out between the two. France has also landed planes in Baghdad recently and has supported Iraq since the 1970’s as a reaction to what was seen as extensive American control in the Middle East, especially in regards to Iran. France supported Iraq during its war with Iran and sees the situation now as being controlled by the US and the British, thus becoming a source of resentment. Partly for this reason, partly for their commercial interests (billions of dollars in debt owed by Iraq), and partly because they see Iraq as a bulwark against Islamic fundamentalism in Iran, the French do not have the animosity towards Saddam Hussein as do other Western nations, and they do not insist on his removal from power.

The Chinese are also an important non-Middle Eastern supporter of Iraq. China has taken more of an ambivalent status towards Iraq when compared to the French and the Russians, but they are an important trading partner and have supported an end to sanctions in meetings of the UN. In addition, Chinese oil companies have made deals with the Iraqi government to modernize oil fields in exchange for drilling rights.

The United States, and to a lesser extent Great Britain, most definitely do not have a positive relationship with Iraq. The United States led the coalition against Iraq during the Gulf War, and prior to that, the US traditionally supported Iran, at least until the fall of the Shah. Even worse for US-Iraqi relationships, the US has long been a supporter of Israel, to the dislike of all Arab countries including Iraq. United States facilities are a potential target for Iraqi WMD’s, and Iraq is thought to sponsor or at least tolerate terrorist groups which target the United States. Revenge for the humiliation and meddling of the Gulf War is a primary concern of Saddam Hussein and much of Iraq’s anti-west rhetoric mentions the United States specifically. The US maintains a no-fly zone above northern Iraq, and such aircraft are shot at by Iraqi forces on average of 12 times per month. Repeated noncooperation with weapons inspectors has led to airstrikes against Iraq since the Gulf War. Western nations, led by the United States, are at the top of the Iraq enemy list.

In other international affairs, India and Iraq have been discussing trading relationships, with a desire to expand economic ties. Pakistan has also sought a trade route through Iran with Iraq, ostensibly as a unification of fellow Islamic nations. Belarussian oil companies have been visiting Iraq, and Canadian, Vietnamese and even US oil companies have expressed interest. In what is a most interesting development, in August of 2000, President Chavez of Venezuela, a fellow OPEC member and a supporter of 3^rd and 4^th world bargaining against the developed world became the first world leader to meet directly with Saddam Hussein since the Gulf War. This was done, to the consternation of the US, to promote bilateral cooperation. This has interesting possibilities for Iraqi international relations. Belgium and Yugoslavia have also expressed interest in renewing trade ties with Iraq. Other Middle Eastern or Islamic African countries such as Algeria, Mauritania and Yemen did not support Iraq in the Gulf War, yet are growing tired of what they perceive as western heavy-handedness in the continuation of sanctions. Even US allies in the Gulf, namely Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, have moved to reestabilish political relationships with Iraq. As a result, considering the fact that it is one of the few nations to ever be officially removed from international trade by the UN, Iraq actually has a fairly broad base of sympathy if not outright support. As time goes on, this is likely to grow.

Iraq is a member of a fairly extensive list of international organizations. This list includes: the Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa (20 mostly Arab nations working to promote African economic development), the Arab Cooperation Council (along with Egypt, Jordan and Yemen to promote economic cooperation and integration for an Arab common market), the Arab fund for Economic and Social Development (with other Arab nations working towards economic and social development), the Arab League (working towards economic, social, political and military cooperation with 22 other Arab nations), the Arab Monetary Fund (for cooperation, development and integration in monetary and economic affairs with other Arab states), the Council of Arab Economic Unity (for economic integration with Arab states), the Customs Cooperation Council (with much of the rest of the world, agreeing to cooperate on international customs matters), G-77 (to promote economic development in developing nations), Interpol (the international crime police organization, along with most of the rest of the world), the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, the International Mobile Satellite Organization (to provide worldwide communication for commercial and safety uses…this indicates that Iraq does have its own satellites), the International Telecommunication Satellite Organ, (to develop global telecommunications systems), the Islamic Development Bank (to promote Islamic economic aid and social development with 50 other Islamic nations), the Nonaligned movement (a remnant from the Cold War of nations desiring to stay free of East/West conflicts), the Arab OPEC, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, the Permanent Council of Arbitration (to facilitate settlement of international disputes), the United Nations, the World Federation of Trade Unions, and the World Tourism Organization. Iraq’s membership in many of these organizations is nothing more than a charade - Iraq trying to promote tourism, humanitarian aid, and international police actions as it blatantly invades its neighbors, uses chemical weapons against its own people and harbors international terrorists is something of an irony. However, Iraq is fairly active in several of these groups. First, as a chief oil producing state, Iraq attempts to have a large voice in both OPEC and the Arab OPEC. In its own interests, it would like to drive prices up, particularly as this would affect the Western world the most. Iraq has long tried to be one of the dominant OPEC members, and were sanctions to be lifted, the power dynamics within this already fragile cartel could theoretically change. Within the Arab world, Iraq is a member of a whole multitude of organizations, all trying to promote development of Arab society in one form or another. Again, Iraq has tried to be a dominant member throughout the past twenty years, and its rich oil reserves have given it a reason to consider itself one of the leaders of the Arab World. It is interesting to note that even within the Arab community, a group tied by ethnicity and religion, there are still divisions. This is clear from the already outlined friends and enemies list, but it is also worth noting that Iraq is a member of some Arab organizations that include nations like Syria and Saudi Arabia as well as being a member of organizations which exclude these nations. The factions within the Middle East are at work in Arab organizations - the Gulf Cooperation Council of which Iraq is not a part but which includes Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates recently condemned Iraq for its non-cooperation with the UN and for its repeated aggressive stance in the Middle East. This adds an interesting dimension to Arab politics.

The one other organization in which Iraq has an active involvement is the UN. This is not to say that it dominates policy, as it is in fact being sanctioned, but the Iraqi ambassador to the UN has worked tirelessly to promote the Iraqi cause and to lobby for support for the lifting of the sanctions. At first that may not have been successful, but the evidence concerning the million or so Iraqi’s, including many children, who have died as a result of the sanctions is helping to change that. Iraq has a lengthy web page based out of the UN which condemns the United States and offers support for Iraq. In meetings of the General Assembly, the Iraqi representative is very vocal about the so-called atrocities of the United States against the Iraqi people as well as the state of Iraq in general, and these repeated reminders are starting to have an effect as indicated by the fact that three of the five permanent members of the Security Council, Russia, France, and to a lesser extent China, support the lifting of the sanctions. Even with limited capabilities in the UN, Iraq has had a presence there.

In conclusion, it is worth considering all of the factors which influence Iraq’s foreign policy in light of actual words spoken by Saddam Hussein. A compilation of various speeches and public addresses made throughout the last ten years reveal the interplay of domestic variables and international affairs. Hussein presents himself as an Arab hero because he effectively stood up to both the Ayatollah in Iran and George Bush in the United States. He makes massive appeals to Arab and Muslim ideas, emphasizing, “Iraq’s turn to Arab values of dignity, honor, and valor.” He also makes extensive use of an anti-Israeli, anti-Western rhetoric, repeatedly mentioning Jerusalem and its sacred importance for Muslims throughout his speeches. In addresses targeted outside of Iraq to other Arab audiences, he makes repeated references to the common blood that unites all Arabs, closing and ending his speeches with, “brothers.” Mentions of the Koran and Allah crop up frequently, and Arab battles for Islam as far back as the Crusades are invoked under the all inclusive banner of, “God be praised for everything.” In a statement which throws a great deal of light upon his recent actions, he blames what he perceives as Arab weakness on the reluctance of its leaders to formulate a unique position on things and work together to reach their goals. What is left unsaid, but is clearly implied, is the fact that Hussein considers himself a leader who can unite the Arab people. In an appeal to his own people he says, “Iraqi’s have a right to live proudly. We do not accept that anyone could injure Iraqi pride or the Iraqi right to have high standards of living.” He refers to the “malicious Westerners” and clearly states on behalf of the Iraqi people that they would prefer death to a threat to Arab honor and values. In particularly pointed references against the United States he says, “The United States is hostile to humanity,” and “Bush, the enemy of God and colleague of the devil.” He even attempts to strengthen his position among developing nations by making at least the promise of free oil to third and fourth world nations to make up for colonial aggression.

Iraq’s international goals are fairly simple: outwit international sanctions, rebuild their army and have the potential to use it aggressively, acquire unconventional weapons, and reenter the Arab ranks. However, these are also extremely ambitious goals, especially in light of the fact that Iraq is technically considered an international outcast. Yet despite his poor international image a decade ago, Saddam Hussein has successfully remained in power and will most likely continue to remain in power unless the international status quo changes. This is a testament to his ability to manipulate the domestic and international issues which affect the formulation of international policy.

As a side note: the information expressed here is not an opinion of the writer, but rather the opinions of a range of sources. As a non-Arab, non-Muslim and non-Iraqi I cannot presume to speak for those three very large groups of people. However, in general terms, the psychological perspectives expressed here are those which were found supported in a variety of sources.