[Allan Topol / AllanTopol.Com]
Lightning paced thriller writer
of International Intrigue
National Bestselling Author
HOME NEWS CONTACT BOOKS ORDER SUBSCRIBE NEWSLETTER ARTICLES

Iraq After Two years
by Allan Topol, [IMAGE]2005

ARTICLE ORIGINALLY APPEARED AT MILITARY.COM, March 23, 2005

Two years ago this month, the United States and its coalition partners invaded Iraq. Now is an opportune time to take stock of what the United States has gained, and what it has lost from this war. I have selected five items on each side of the balance sheet for discussion. There are of course many others.

On the positive side.

  • First, and most important, Saddam Hussein is no longer ruler of Iraq. Unquestionably, Saddam was one of the most brutal and cruel tyrants on the world stage at the time of the invasion. The thousands of Iraqis who survived torture and imprisonment can testify to this fact. Those whose remains have been found in unmarked graves bear witness to the despot’s character.

    Saddam posed a threat not merely to his own people, but to every other country in the region. He fermented unrest in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, financed Palestinian suicide bombers and fought a long and bloody war with Iran. As long as he ruled, he was a destabilizing factor in this critical region. The entire world is a better place without Iraq in the tight clasp of his demonic power.

  • Second, the invasion sent a powerful message to other dictators and totalitarian regimes, particularly in the Middle East. “Change your ways or risk invasion by the United States.” Quadaffi, the Libyan ruler, understood that message very quickly and took positive steps. Even the mullahs in Iran have tread more softly. Not the Syrians through. Assad continues to challenge the United States with his assistance of the Iraqi insurgents and unwillingness to pull out of Lebanon.

  • Third, democracy has been rearing its head in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East as a direct result of the invasion. The January elections in Iraq were inconceivable under Saddam. Several other Arab states have opened the window to democracy for the first time—albeit a crack. Egypt is one. Even the despot House of Saud may be considering some concessions.

  • Fourth, the war has in the short run ensured the uninterrupted flow of Middle Eastern oil which is the lifeblood of the American economy. Yes, the prices are high and they will continue to climb. But the oil is flowing. The presence of a powerful American military in the region has the effect of thwarting those who would attempt another radical revolution.

    Those who say the war had nothing to do with oil are mistaken. Anything that involves the Middle East is about oil. The closer we are to having our hands on the spigot, the less chance there will be of someone turning it off.

  • Fifth, the war was an opportunity for the United states to test some of its more sophisticated weapons. American technology in the early days of the war, particularly air attacks coordinated from the ground were awesome. The Iraqi troops could run, but they could not hide. The American military raised the bar for the world. The Chinese know that they still lag behind.

    • On the negative side.

  • American casualties. The numbers of dead and wounded have far exceeded popular expectations. Thousands of American families have suffered a huge loss. With the insurgency continuing, the upper limit on our casualties is unknown. This is a huge price to pay.

  • Second, relations with our allies, particularly in Europe, have been strained by the war. Perhaps this was inevitable as Europe flexes its muscles, seeking parity with the United States. The invasion and the administration’s reliance on the dubious claim of weapons of mass destruction exacerbated that process.

  • Third, the United States has incurred the wrath of some people in the Arab world on the so called “Arab street.” This was inevitable by having western nations invade an Arab country. Personally, I believe that whatever ill will the United States has incurred is more than offset by the grudging respect we are receiving. The invasion demonstrated that the United States follows through on its threats. Our words cannot be dismissed.

  • Fourth, the United States’ ground forces and their supporting equipment are stretched thin because of the war. At this point, we seem to have enough resources to stay the course in Iraq until Iraqi soldiers can assume a broader role in quelling the insurgency. However, we are not in a position to send ground troops to another hot spot should one develop in Asia or elsewhere in the Middle East.

    Moreover, recruitment for the military is suffering. Some in the Pentagon are questioning the long term impact of the strain on our Army as the insurgency continues. Last week, General Richard A. Cody, Army Vice Chief Of Staff, testified at a Senate hearing. “What keeps me awake at night is what will this all volunteer force look like in 2007?”

  • Fifth and finally, the drain of the war on the United States Treasury is substantial. To be sure, the tax cut and a weak economy have reduced revenues. The combination of the treasury deficit and trade imbalance would put the United States in a perilous situation without the war. However, that is one more factor contributing to a looming financial crisis as our stability depends on the willingness of foreigners to finance our deficits.

    • So what’s the bottom line? Do the positives outweigh the negatives?

    At this point, as Iraq stumbles toward democracy and similar trends are occurring elsewhere in the Arab world, the answer in my view is yes. However, the tally is not yet final. If Iraq ends up as an Iranian style theocracy and the window of democracy slams shut elsewhere in the region, the answer may be different.