Victory is Not Possible; Defeat is Not an Option: The US, Iraq and the Middle East
Occasional paper no. 5
GEORGE C MARSHALL CENTER APO AE 09053 EUROPEAN CENTER FOR SECURITY STUDIES
Pagination or Media Count:
Victory in Iraq was to have many faces. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the US argued that the strategic implication of regime change would be threefold. The intervention would overthrow Saddam Husseins Baathist regime, rendering Iraq free and democratic and no longer a threat to its neighbors. It would act as a demonstration model to deter other axis of evil states from attempting to gain WMD and supporting terrorists. It would precipitate domino democratization throughout the Middle East. The capacity for compromise demonstrated in the formation of the Iraqi government in April 2005 following the Purple Revolution the 30 January 2005 elections represents the unleashing of a democratic ethic, a democratic spirit throughout the Middle East. The Cedar Revolution in Lebanon, womens rights in Gulf States the appointment of a cabinet minister in Kuwait in June 2005, reforms in Egypt under President Mubarak, the February-April 2005 municipal elections in Saudi Arabia and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in August-September 2005 are all cited in support of this contention. The destruction and dislocation in Lebanon as a result of the Israeli-Hizbullah conflict that erupted in July 2006 is described by US President George W. Bush as a moment of opportunity and by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as the birth pangs of new Middle East .4 She stated I have no interest in diplomacy for the sake of returning Lebanon and Israel to the status quo ante. I think it would be a mistake. What we are seeing here, in a sense, is the growing the birth pangs of a new Middle East and, whatever we do, we have to be certain that we re pushing forward to the new Middle East, not going back to the old one.
- Military Operations, Strategy and Tactics