:: wikimiki.org ::

2003 Iraq War Timeline

2003 Iraq war timeline

This is the ongoing timeline of the 2003 Iraq war, principally the military actions and consequences of the US-led invasion. See Iraq disarmament crisis timeline 2001-2003 and preparations for 2003 invasion of Iraq for events leading up to the invasion.

March 20, 2003

At approximately 02:30 UTC or about 90 minutes after the lapse of the 48-hour deadline, at 5:30 am local time, explosions were heard in Baghdad. At 03:15 UTC, or 10:15 pm EST, President George W. Bush announced that he had ordered the coalition to launch an "attack of opportunity" against specified targets in Iraq. According to The Pentagon, 36 Tomahawk missiles and two F-117 launched GBU-27 bombs had been used in this assault. It has become clear that the targets were high-level Iraqi governmental officials, including Saddam Hussein himself, and were based on specific intelligence which led the U.S. government to believe it knew his movements. Unintentionally, civilian buildings were also hit. Later, Iraqi state television broadcast an address by Saddam Hussein. The U.S. and U.K. analysed the footage closely because they believed one of his body doubles may have been used, but the U.S. eventually said it believed the address was indeed delivered by Saddam Hussein himself. It has not yet been ascertained when the address was recorded, however. Speculation started of the possible death of Saddam Hussein. It was later announced that Special Forces troops were operating inside Iraq; Australia, the United Kingdom and the U.S. all have Special Forces troops in the area. Soon after the strike on Baghdad, Iraq launched a number of missiles at targets in Kuwait, including the coalition forces stationed there. The coalition reported that they caused no damage. Some have speculated that these may have been Scud missiles, but this has not yet been confirmed. If true, this would be a material breach of UN Security Council Resolution 1441 and would be counter to what Iraqi officials had claimed. It is known that they carried conventional explosive warheads, not chemical or biological payloads. Later in the day, both U.K. and U.S. ground troops moved into the demilitarised zone between Iraq and its neighbour, Kuwait, and then into Iraq itself. During the night, eight British and four American troops were killed when a transport helicopter crashed. Official reports said the crash was not due to enemy action. The coalition forces were commanded by General Tommy Franks. The Iraqis named commanders a few days before the invasion: General Izzat Ibrahim in the north, General Ali Hassan al-Majid in the south, Mizban Khadr Hadi in the central Euphrates area and Qusay Hussein in the central area including Baghdad and Tikrit.
- Around 02:34 UTC, more than 40 satellite-guided Tomahawk cruise missiles are launched from U.S. warships in the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, "surgically" striking a bunker in Baghdad believed to be holding top Iraqi officials. At 03:15 UTC, President Bush said in addressing the nation, "On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign." The military action is being dubbed "Operation Iraqi Freedom". [http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/19/sprj.irq.main/index.html] Later, on May 29, 2003, CBS Evening News reports that the bunker never existed. [http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Iraq]
- Protests take place around the world. In Australia, they take such forms as a "NO WAR" slogan being painted on the Sydney Opera House, Greenpeace demonstrators chaining themselves to the gates of the Australian Prime Minister's residence (the Lodge) and a former Navy officer burning his uniform outside Australia's Parliament House. In Denmark, Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen is sprayed with red paint for his pro-US stand. In the United Kingdom, Tony Blair survives a rebellion within his own party to win parliamentary support of war actions in Iraq.

March 21, 2003

Early in the morning, British Royal Marines occupied the strategically important al-Faw peninsula in the south-eastern corner of Iraq. Later in the day, a combined force of Royal Marines and U.S. Marines were said by official sources to have captured the nearby town of Umm Qasr, Iraq's only deep-water port. Coalition forces were greeted with cheers from some Iraqi citizens as they took control of the city. Earlier, the U.S. Marines had been forced to retreat by heavy gunfire after crossing the Iraqi border. They were able to cross the border again with the support of two M1 Abrams tanks. A BBC reporter with the troops said that the coalition forces were not in complete control of the town, and reported that helicopters had been called in to help establish control. Throughout the day, U.S. and U.K. forces moved through the south of the country, with forces towards the East reportedly reaching the edge of Iraq's second city, Basra and the U.S. Third Infantry division towards the West reaching the outskirts of the strategically crucial town of Nasiriya on the river Euphrates, where they came under fire from Iraqi defences. The British government claimed that the forces had all the major southern oil fields under control. There was also fighting in the north of the country, with some reports that it involved U.S. Special Forces. During the day, a number of oil wells - seven, according to the British government - were reported to be on fire. Again according to the British government, two of the fires were extinguished by special firefighting troops. The Iraqi government denied that oil wells had been set on fire, saying that it had set fire to oil-filled trenches as a defensive measure against airstrikes. At around 18:00 UTC, Baghdad came under heavy aerial bombardment, in what appears to be the start of the promised massive aerial attack of Iraq intended to produce a "Shock and awe" effect on the population of the country. The Pentagon later reported that 320 Tomahawk missiles had been launched on targets in and around Baghdad. According to the Iraqi Minister for Information, the strikes wounded 207 civilians, although this has not been independently verified. Simultaneous airstrikes were reported to have taken place in the northern cities of Mosul and Kirkuk. Near midnight UTC, it was reported by the U.S. military that the commander and deputy commander of the Iraqi Army 51st Division had surrendered to U.S. Marines. It was not reported how many of the division's men had also surrendered. The Iraq government reported that no Iraqi troops had surrendered, and that reports to the contrary were US propaganda. In Southern Iraq, Iraqi forces are reported to have fired on Allied lines with Russian made 122mm howitzers; weapons used by the US against Iraqi forces are reported to include 155mm howitzers, Hellfire missiles, Cobra helicopter gunships, and bombardment by explosives and napalm. During the day, the first U.S. combat casualties were reported - two U.S. Marines were killed in action in southern Iraq. Iraqi state television showed what it said was footage of Saddam Hussein meeting with one of his sons, in a further attempt to prove that he had not been killed in the previous day's attack on Baghdad.
- United States and United Kingdom military forces began their advance into southern Iraq. British troops captured the Faw Peninsula in southern Iraq, and U.S. forces capture much of the southern port city of Umm Qasr. U.S. military officials confirmed that oil wells had been set ablaze by Iraqi forces near the Kuwaiti border. A U.S. Marine CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter crashed in northern Kuwait early in the morning, killing all 8 British and four U.S. crew members on board.
- The "shock and awe" bombardment of military targets in Iraq by cruise missiles and smart bombs began.
- 1,000 Turkish troops entered northern Iraq to reinforce units already there.

March 22, 2003

Airstrikes on Baghdad continued, with the attacks now concentrated on the city's outskirts. Around midnight UTC (early morning local time), the Turkish military stated that 1,500 Turkish troops had moved into northern Iraq. The intervention of Turkish troops had been opposed by the U.S. German government has announced that it will call back the German AWACS personnel watching NATO airspace above Turkey if Turkish troops engage in fights in northern Iraq. At 1:15 UTC, a collision of two British Sea King helicopters over the Gulf killed six British soldiers and one American. At 10:00 UTC, it was reported that U.S. forces were attempting to occupy the city of Basra, and were involved in a major tank battle on the western side of the city. Kurdish officials report a US missile attack on territory held by the Kurdish Islamist group Ansar al-Islam. According to Iraqi government reports, there have been 2 civilians killed and 207 wounded, mostly women and children. There have been no defections or surrenders of Iraqi troops, and western footage to the contrary is showing kidnapped Iraqi civilians. Five US tanks and numerous vehicles have been destroyed by Iraqi fighters, and the coalition forces entered but been repelled from Umm Qasr. Iraqi government puts a bounty of 50 million dinars ($33,000) for capture, 25 million dinars for the killing of each "mercenary".
- Parts of the city of Basra are entered by the British.
- A hand grenade attack on a rear base of the 101st Airborne Division in Kuwait caused the death of Capt. Chris Seifert of the Army and Maj. Gregory Stone of the Air Force and injuries to 14 others. An American soldier, Sgt. Hasan Akbar was arrested for the attack.
- Two Royal Navy Westland Sea King helicopters collide in mid-air over the Gulf killing seven crew. Both craft were based on the HMS Ark Royal (R07).

March 23, 2003

USA and British forces succeeded in taking the airport outside of Basra, and are in battle with Iraqi forces for control of the city itself. US Marines battle Iraqi forces near the city of Nassiriya, a key crossing of the Euphrates River about 225 miles southeast of Baghdad. A British Tornado fighter airplane was hit by an American Patriot missile resulting in the death of the two British pilots. Media report about pictures of British and American soldiers wounded and killed by Iraqi forces, as shown by the Arabian Al Jazeera TV network. In greater detail 16 American soldiers are missing, 5 of them were shown on Iraqi state TV as POWs and at least 4 were shown dead in what appeared to be a hospital room. In another incident about 10 US Marines were confirmed to be killed, when they run into an ambush. CNN has shown pictures of two USMC armormed personnel carriers and a number of other vehicles destroyed. The British TV network ITV reports that its reporter Terry Lloyd was killed yesterday near Basra. Some media sources assume that he was killed by US or British soldiers shooting at Iraqi soldiers in cars next to his car.
- Continued battle around the Iraqi cities of Basra and Nassiriya.
- Iraq reports that it captured a number of American prisoners of war. The United States Military states that 12 mechanics were missing. A videotape of the captives and dead mechanics was released that show possible torture and execution-style killings. US officials charge that Iraqi treatment of the captives violates the Geneva Convention.
- A RAF Panavia Tornado is brought down by "friendly fire" by a US Patriot missile battery.
- Coalition forces took control of a large complex of buildings in An Najaf Province near the city of Najaf. Some news sources have proclaimed that this is a "huge chemical weapons plant" [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81935,00.html] but Pentagon officials have called such announcements "premature" and say that no weapons of mass destruction have yet been found.
- In Belgium legal complaints are filed against American officials for "crimes against humanity." It was reported that an Iraqi representing seven families deposited complaints for violation of human rights against former U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Norman Schwarzkopf in Belgium. Supported by a socialist deputy and a non-governmental organization (NGO), the Iraqis denounce the bombing of a shelter which had made 403 civil victims in Baghdad in February 1991 during the Gulf War. This is made possible by the Belgian law of universal competence, which provides justice on war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, and can apply to any nationalities. Colin Powell indicated the event was a "serious problem", affecting the ability to go to Belgium, in particular to NATO in Brussels. Colin Powell stated this law was a subject of worry.

March 24, 2003

An operation of about 30 attack helicopters against the Medina Division of Iraq's Republican guard, entrenched in the Karbala area, has taken place during the early hours of March 24. One US Apache helicopter which was captured by Iraqi civilians, along with its two crew members, appeared later in Arab satellite chanels. A CNN embedded reporter with a helicopter unit that participated in the raid, also reported the destruction of another helicopter and that helicopters were under heavy fire, with only two of them managing to achieve their objectives. Its crew however was safely recovered. China has given the United States the address of its embassy in Baghdad in the hope of avoiding a repeat of the deadly 1999 bombing of its mission in Belgrade, diplomatic sources said on Monday. China passed on the details of its Iraq mission, at around the time US-led coalition aircraft started dropping bombs in and around Baghdad, to prevent any repeat of the 1999 bombing Washington said happened because of outdated maps, they said. [http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/03/24/china.embassy.reut/] Five people, including one woman, were killed when a missile fell on their houses in a populated district in the west of Baghdad. Tensions increase between the United States and Russia. The United States charged the Russians of supposed deliveries of Russian weapons in Iraq. The spokesman of the American President, Ari Fleischer, rejected denials of Moscow and assured that Washington has "evidence" of these deliveries, which could give the Iraqis invaluable assets against the Anglo-American forces. Devices listed are binoculars for night vision, GPS units, and anti-tank missiles. Ari Fleischer said the American governemnent ask the Russians to immediately put an end to its assistance. It reminded them that the deliveries of this type of materials and equipment in Iraq were the subject of sanctions by the United Nations. The Russian government and the companies mentioned as having delivered armaments to Iraq have rejected these allegations on Monday, describing them as "inventions" and reaffirming that Moscow strictly respected the embargo imposed by UNO in Baghdad. Russian president Vladimir Putin rejected the American charges himself during a telephone conversation with George W. Bush, the Presidential press secretary indicated Tuesday, quoted by the Interfax agency.
- The Arab League voted 21-1 in favor of a resolution demanding the immediate and unconditional removal of U.S. and British soldiers from Iraq. The lone dissenting vote was cast by Kuwait.

March 25, 2003

Coalition forces begin fighting Iraqi militia in Basra, second largest city in Iraq. British soldiers report that the Shiite population of Basra appears to be rebelling against the Iraqi militia. The anti-Saddam resistance group based in Iran, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, confirmed that the Shiite revolt was taking place in Basra. According to some sources, the Iraqi militia forces are attacking the local Basra civilians, attempting to stop the revolt, with artillery and mortars. The Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed al-Sahhaf denied that any uprising was taking place in Basra. The Red Cross warned that a humanitarian crisis was emerging in the city. The Red Cross, Save the Children and other organizations are attempting to reach the city. Kuwait also has a caravan of supply trucks heading north into Iraq. Coalition forces announced that the port city of Umm Qasr was now "safe and open" and divers began searching for mines off shore. Once the waters are clear, British ships, which are waiting off of the Iraqi coast, will land in Umm Qasr with additional medicine, food and water for the area. Coalition forces had a small supply of food and water that they began to pass out to the citizens of Umm Qasr. While fighting in Nasiriya, coalition forces discovered and confiscated weapons caches and gear to protect against chemical weapons, including a T-55 tank, over 3,000 chemical suits with masks, and Iraqi munitions and military uniforms. All of this equipment was hidden in a Nasiriya hospital.
- U.S. forces are advancing on Baghdad, hampered by extreme dust storms.
- Thousands of chemical suits as well as a tank and a large stockpile of weapons are reportedly found by coalition forces in the An Nasiriyah hospital in Iraq. Coalition forces entered the hospital after being fired upon by Iraqi soldiers hiding in the building.[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82182,00.html] U.S. officials report the possibility that chemical weapons would be deployed on coalition troops as they approach Baghdad. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82145,00.html]
- British forces report what they believe to be a popular uprising in the city of Basra that provoked Iraqi troops to fire-on civilians with mortars. British troops then shelled the mortar position. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82088,00.html]
- According to a U.S. officer, approximately 650 Iraqis were killed around Najaf "in the last twenty-four hours" while the American forces would not have, on their side, recorded any victim. This assessment, not confirmed by any independent source, could be the heaviest since the beginning of the offensive, the Thursday prior.

March 26, 2003

The American central command in Qatar admitted Wednesday to have carried out bombardments which could have killed civilians due to the fact that Iraqi military assests were being placed close to civilian areas - within 300 feet (100 m) in some cases. This occurred a few hours after two explosions occurred in on a commercial street of Baghdad which killed 14 Iraqi civilians and injured thirty more, according to Iraqi civil defense. Also on this day special units of the Iraqi Republican Guard, for the first time, took part in the fights against the American and British forces. Just after the marketplace explosions in Baghdad, Russia called for "the immediate end of the war against Iraq" and discussions to resume within the Security Council.

March 27, 2003

- U.S. forces have taken the bridge at Samawah

March 28, 2003

- Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution allowing the resumption of the Oil for Food program, suspended on March 18 and upon which depends the subsistence on 60 % of the Iraqi population. The Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan underlined that this vote should not be confused with a recognition of the war carried out and with a way to legitimize the military action afterwards. The resolution makes clear that the chief responsibility for addressing humanitarian consequences of the war would fall to the United States and Britain if they take control of the country. This refers to the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which defines the responsibilities of the occupying power.
- US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld accused Syria of supplying arms and material to Iraq; Syria denied these allegations.
- The first coalition forces humanitarian aid ship, the RFA Sir Galahad, is preparing to dock at the port of Umm Qasr in Iraq at 11.45 GMT.
- The Lebanon TV network al-Minar crew say they found about 40 dead bodies of U.S. soldiers in the desert outside Maseriah. They accuse the U.S. of destroying all their equipment after they notified the U.S. of the finding. [http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=6649&TagID=2]

March 29, 2003

- The Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf accused the US forces of killing 140 civilians during the last 24 hours and denied allegations that Iraqi soldiers are disguising themselves as civilians.
- An explosion damaged a shopping center in Kuwait City before dawn. Initial reports suggested the cause was a malfunctioning U.S. cruise missile, but later reports focused on an Iraqi Silkworm missile as being responsible. No injuries are reported.
- A Iraqi military suicide bomber, driving a taxi, killed four US soldiers in an attack. "We will use any means to kill our enemy in our land and we will follow the enemy into its land," Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said, "This is just the beginning. You'll hear more pleasant news later."

March 31, 2003

- US troops kill 7 civilians including women and children in a car whose driver refuses to stop at a checkpoint. According to one account the driver ignored several warning shots, as well as gunfire into the vehicle's engine. According to another account, no warning shots were fired.
- Journalist Peter Arnett is fired by NBC after giving an interview to Iraqi television, which some considered as unfairly critical of the Bush administration's war on Iraq. Later in the day, Arnett is hired by a British tabloid, the Daily Mirror.
- The Pentagon orders embedded FOX News reporter Geraldo Rivera from its troops and demands him to leave Iraq after accusing him of reporting United States troop positions.

April 1, 2003

A 32-year-old Iraqi lawyer, whose wife worked as a nurse at a hospital in Nasiriyah, risks his life to help coalition forces rescue prisoner of war Private First Class Jessica Lynch. The lawyer witnessed Lynch being tortured and decided to help her. The man immediately began searching for coalition forces to tell them about Lynch. Black Hawk helicopters flew in under cover of darkness, touched down next to the hospital, and a team of heavily-armed commandos stormed the building, using hand-drawn maps given to them by the lawyer and his wife. Lynch was successfully rescued and the lawyer and his family were flown to a refugee center in the southern port city of Umm Qasr. The military did not confirm the Iraqi lawyer's involvement.

April 2, 2003

U.S. forces reach the outskirts of Baghdad and encounter fierce fighting from small units of Iraqi Republican Guard. Kurdish militia, aided by U.S. forces, move into Kanilan near Mosul in Northern Iraq. Citizens living in the town tell reporters that they are happy that the Iraqi soldiers are gone.

April 3, 2003

U.S. forces take control of Saddam International Airport, in southern Baghdad.

April 4, 2003

MSNBC finds evidence of the deadly toxins ricin, and botulinum at a laboratory in northern Iraq, used as a training camp for Ansar al-Islam, a terrorist group with ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network. The tests conducted by MSNBC were the same type of tests used by U.N. weapons inspectors. U.S. officials said that they planned on conducting their own tests of the area. U.S. forces search the Latifiyah Explosives and Ammunition Plant, south of Baghdad, and discover thousands of boxes full of vials of a white powdery substance, atropine (a nerve agent antidote) and Arabic documents on how to engage in chemical warfare. Early reports suggest that the powdery substance is an explosive, although additional tests are needed. Some vials contained a liquid. The facility had been identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency as a suspected chemical, biological and nuclear weapons site. U.N. weapons inspectors visited the plant at least nine times, including as recently as February 18, 2003. Later tests show no forbidden weaponry.

April 8, 2003

U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei reiterates a statement he made on March 31 that only the UN IAEA has a mandate to search out and destroy any nuclear weapons or parts of a nuclear weapons program found in Iraq. [http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030416/wl_nm/iraq_nuclear_inspections_dc_2]
- Journalist deaths by U.S. fire: Two of American air to surface missiles hit the Qatar satellite station Al Jazeera's office in Baghdad and kill a reporter and wound a cameraman. The nearby office of Arab satellite channel Abu Dhabi is also hit by air strikes. Al Jazeera accuses the U.S. of attacking Arab media to hide facts. On the same day a U.S. army tank fires into the 15th floor of the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, where almost all foreign journalists base on, and kills two cameramen and wounds three. In the Abu Dhabi case the station airs the picture of Iraqi fire from beneath of the camera. In the hotel case, however, other journalists on the scene deny any fire from or around the hotel. [http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/08/international/worldspecial/08CND-CAMERAMAN.html], [http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=1503&ncid=1503&e=1&u=/afp/20030408/ts_afp/iraq_war_baghdad_media_030408165654]

April 9, 2003

- Baghdad falls to U.S. forces. Some Iraqis cheer in the streets after American infantrymen seize deserted Ba'ath Party ministries and pull down a huge iron statue of Saddam Hussein, ending his 24-year rule of Iraq. Looting of government offices breaks out and Hussein's fighting forces melt away in large portions of the city. [http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/04/09/MN249161.DTL]

April 10, 2003

- Kurdish troops occupy the city of Kirkuk in Iraq with little resistance. [http://www.canada.com/news/story.asp?id=45D53827-FA52-4452-9E87-7DF9276D26B9]

April 12, 2003

The looting and unrest, especially in major cities Baghdad and Basra are becoming a very serious issue. In Baghdad, with the notable exception of the Oil Ministry, which was guarded by American troops, the majority of government and public buildings were totally plundered, to the point there were nothing of any value left. This includes the National Museum of Iraq as well as most major hospitals. The damages of the wave of plunders to the Iraqi civilian infrastructure, economy and cultural inheritance, are getting higher than those from three weeks of U.S. bombing.

April 13, 2003

Tikrit, the home town of Saddam Hussein, and the last town not under control of the coalition, was taken by American marines. Perhaps to the surprise of many, there was little resistance.

April 15, 2003

With the fall of the Tikrit region, the coalition partners declared the war effectively over.

Continued at 2003 - 2004 occupation of Iraq timeline.

External links

Collections of news reports:
- [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/middle_east/2002/conflict_with_iraq/default.stm BBC]
- [http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/ CNN]
- [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/0,2759,423009,00.html The Guardian]
- [http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsHome.jhtml?type=focusIraqNews Reuters news agency]
- Category:War timelines

2003 Invasion of Iraq

:This article covers invasion specifics. For general information see: Iraq War, Post-invasion Iraq. The 2003 Invasion of Iraq began on March 20 comprising United States and United Kingdom forces (98%), and several other nations. The 2003 Iraq invasion marked the beginning of what is commonly referred to as the Iraq War; however the United States never actually declared war on Iraq, which can only be done by Congress. Baghdad fell on April 9th, 2003. On May 1, 2003 U.S. president George W. Bush declared the end of major combat operations terminating the Ba'ath Party's rule and removing Iraqi president Saddam Hussein from office. Coalition forces ultimately captured Saddam Hussein on December 13, 2003. A transitional period began thereafter .

Political and diplomatic aspects

On October 11, 2002, the United States Senate passed a resolution 77-23 in favor of giving U.S. President George W. Bush the authority to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein did not give up his Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). The United States House of Representatives took only hours before approving an identical resolution, 296-133[http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/]. In his March 17, 2003 address to the nation, U.S. President George W. Bush demanded that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his two sons Uday and Qusay leave Iraq, giving them a 48-hour deadline [http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/iraq/20030317-7.html]. This demand was reportedly rejected [http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2003/0318iraqreject.htm]. Since the invasion began without the explicit approval of the United Nations Security Council, some legal authorities regard it as a violation of the U.N. Charter. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004, "From our point of view and the U.N. charter point of view, it was illegal." [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25685-2004Sep16.html] However, critics of the UN point out that between the years of 1991 and 1998, the United Nations passed 11 resolutions demanding that Saddam Hussein comply with IAEA and UN inspectors, suggesting that the UN was not properly equipped to handle the Iraq crisis. Moreover, in light of the Oil-for-Food scandal that involved Kofi Annan's son and perhaps Annan himself, critics say that the Secretary-General may have had personal interest in preserving the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Military aspects

United States military operations were conducted under the codename Operation Iraqi Freedom [http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030403-3.html], as quoted by George W. Bush on April 3, 2003. The United Kingdom military operation was named Operation Telic, and Australia's as Operation Falconer. Approximately 100,000 United States troops and 26,000 British troops, and smaller forces from other nations, collectively called the "Coalition of the Willing," entered Iraq primarily through a staging area in Kuwait. In terms of all military personnel involved in the Gulf region (ie. including naval, logistics, inteligence and air force personel) the numbers were 214,000 Americans, 45,000 British and 2,000 Australians. Plans for opening a second front in the north were abandoned when Turkey officially refused the use of its territory for such purposes. Forces also supported Iraqi Kurdish militia troops, estimated to number upwards of 50,000. Despite the refusal of Turkey, the United States conducted parachute operations in the north and dropped the 173rd Airborne Brigade, thereby removing the necessity of any approval from Turkey. The number of Iraqi military personnel prior to the war was uncertain, but was believed to have been poorly-equipped[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/26/iraq/main546241.shtml][http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030326-lastchance01.htm][http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=607]. The International Institute for Strategic Studies estimated the armed forces to number 389,000 (army 350,000, navy 2,000, air force 20,000 and air defence 17,000), the paramilitary Fedayeen Saddam 44,000, and reserves 650,000 [http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3325]. Other estimates number the army and Republican Guard between 280,000 to 350,000 and 50,000 to 80,000, respectively [http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/ground-org.htm], and the paramilitary between 20,000 and 40,000 [http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030327-fedayeen02.htm]. There were an estimated thirteen infantry divisions, ten mechanized and armored divisions, as well as some special forces units. The Iraqi Air Force and Navy played a negligible role in the conflict.

Prelude

Since the end of the Gulf War of 1991, Iraq's relations with the UN, the US, and the UK remained poor. In the absence of a Security Council consensus that Iraq had fully complied with the terms of the Persian Gulf War ceasefire, both the UN and the US enforced numerous economic sanctions against Iraq throughout the Clinton administration, and patrolled Iraqi airspace to enforce Iraqi no-fly zones. The United States Congress also passed the "Iraq Liberation Act" in October 1998, which provided $97 million for Iraqi "democratic opposition organizations" in order to "establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq." [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.4655.ENR:] This contrasted with the terms set out in U.N. Resolution 687 [http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm], all of which related to weapons and weapons programs, not to what regime was in place. Weapons inspectors had also been used to gather information on Iraq's WMD program. That, of course, was their whole purpose in being there - that was their job. The information was then, quite logically, used in targeting decisions during Operation Desert Fox [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/unscom2.htm], [http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/scomspy.htm]. At the same time Tony Blair's Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, could not guarantee that an invasion in the circumstances would not be challenged on legal grounds [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/frontpage/4478023.stm]. The United States Republican Party's campaign platform in the U.S. presidential election, 2000 called for "full implementation" of the Iraq Liberation Act and removal of Saddam Hussein with a focus on rebuilding a coalition, tougher sanctions, reinstating inspections, and support for the pro-democracy, opposition exile group, Iraqi National Congress then headed by Ahmed Chalabi. [http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/republican/features/platform.00/] In September 2000, in the Rebuilding America's Defenses (pg. 17) report, Project for the New American Century, a think tank, suggested that the United States shift to more ground-based air forces to help contain the forces of Saddam Hussein so that "the demand for carrier presence in the region can be relaxed." Upon the election of George W. Bush as president, many advocates of such a policy (including some of those who wrote the 2000 report) were included in the new administration's foreign policy circle. According to former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill, as widely reported by the mainstream press, an attack was planned since the inauguration, and the first security council meeting discussed plans on invasion of the country. O'Neill later clarified that these discussions were part of a continuation of foreign policy first put into place by the Clinton Administration. [http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/13/oneill.bush/] Notes from aides who were with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center one year later, on the day of the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack, reflect that he wanted, "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit [Saddam Hussein] at same time. Not only [Osama bin Laden]." The notes also quote him as saying, "Go massive," and "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/september11/main520830.shtml] Shortly thereafter, the George W. Bush administration announced a War on Terrorism, accompanied by the doctrine of 'pre-emptive' military action dubbed the Bush doctrine. A preemptive war requires that the declared purpose be to respond to an imminent threat of war by the other power, whereas wars instituted against a hypothetical future threat are more properly called preventive war and is generally considered a war of aggression. But, since America was attacked first, on 11 September, the war became pre-emptive only in the sense of hitting the enemy before he could strike AGAIN. The future threat was no longer hypothetical. Over 3,000 dead Americans in one day would certainly be an argument for conducting operations to prevent further such occurances. From the 90s, US officials have constantly voiced concerns about ties between the government of Saddam Hussein and some particular terrorist activities, notably in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which have been confirmed by subsequent reports; on the other hand, the September 11 commission in June, 2004 released a staff report that said it found 'no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States.'" Nonetheless, there has been hard evidence to show that the Iraqi leader has not only aided and abetted terrorists, but financed them as well.[http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/18/saddam.terror/] In 2002 the Iraq disarmament crisis arose primarily as a diplomatic situation. In October 2002, with the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" (Adopted 296-133 by the House of Representatives and 77-23 by the Senate), the United States Congress granted President Bush the authority to wage war against Iraq. The Joint Resolution was worded so as to encourage, but not require, UN Security Council approval for military action, although as a matter of international law the US required explicit Security Council approval for an invasion unless an attack by Iraq had been imminent — the US administration argued that there was an "urgent," "growing," and "immediate" threat. [http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=24970] The joint resolution allowed the President of the United States to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq." In November 2002, United Nations actions regarding Iraq culminated in the unanimous passage of UN Security Council Resolution 1441 and the resumption of weapons inspections. However, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan later stated that the subsequent invasion was a violation of the UN Charter. Force was not authorized by resolution 1441 itself, as the language of the resolution mentioned "serious consequences," which is generally not understood by Security Council members to include the use of force to overthrow the government; however the threat of force, as cultivated by the Bush administration, was prominent at the time of the vote. Both the U.S. ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, and the UK ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, in promoting Resolution 1441 on 8 November, 2002, had given assurances that it provided no "automaticity," no "hidden triggers," no step to invasion without consultation of the Security Council [http://manila.usembassy.gov/wwwhira3.html]. Such consultation was forestalled by the US and UK's abandonment of the Security Council procedure and their invasion of Iraq. Richard Perle, a senior member of the administration's Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, argued in November 2003, that the invasion was against international law, but still justified [http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/20/1069027255087.html], [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1089158,00.html]. There is still much disagreement among international lawyers on whether prior resolutions, relating to the 1991 war and later inspections, permitted the invasion. The United States also began preparations for an invasion of Iraq, with a host of diplomatic, public relations, and military preparations.

Rationale

Prior to George W. Bush being elected president, several members of the Bush team, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz wrote urging an invasion of Iraq as part of a larger Middle East policy. One document, entitled "[http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century], was written in September 2000, stating 'The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.' In the wake of the September 11 attacks and the relative success of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the Bush administration felt that it had sufficient military justification and public support in the United States for further operations against perceived threats in the Middle East. The relations between some coalition members and Iraq had never improved since 1991, and the nations remained in a state of low-level conflict marked by American and British air-strikes, sanctions, and threats against Iraq. Iraqi radar had also locked onto and anti-aircraft guns and missiles were fired upon coalition airplanes enforcing the northern and southern no-fly zones, which had been implemented after the Gulf War in 1991. Throughout 2002, the U.S. administration made it clear that removing Saddam Hussein from power was a major goal, although it offered to accept major changes in Iraqi military and foreign policy in lieu of this. Specifically, the stated justification for the invasion included Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction, links with terrorist organizations and human rights violations in Iraq under the Saddam Hussein government, issues that are detailed below. To that end, the stated goals of the invasion, according to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, were:
- Self-defense
- find and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, weapons programs, and terrorists
- collect intelligence on networks of weapons of mass destruction and terrorists
- Humanitarian
- end sanctions and to deliver humanitarian support (According to Madeline Albright, half a million Iraqi children had died because of sanctions.)
- United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution
- Resolution 1205, made in 1999.
- Regime Change
- end the Saddam Hussein government
- help Iraq's transition to democratic self-rule
- Other
- secure Iraq's oil fields and other resources Many staff and supporters within the Bush administration had other, more ambitious goals for the war as well. Many claimed that the war could act as a catalyst for democracy and peace in the Middle East, and that once Iraq became democratic and prosperous other nations would quickly follow suit due to this demonstration effect, and thus the social environment that allowed terrorism to flourish would be eliminated. However, for diplomatic, bureaucratic reasons these goals were played down in favor of justifications that Iraq represented a specific threat to the United States and to international law. Little evidence was presented actually linking the government of Iraq to al-Qaeda (see below). Opponents of the Iraq war disagreed with many of the arguments presented by the administration, attacking them variously as being untrue, inadequate to justify a preemptive war, or likely to have results different from the administration's intentions. Further, they asserted various alternate reasons for the invasion. Different groups asserted that the war was fought primarily for:
- Energy economics
- to gain control over Iraq's hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintain the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market (since 2000, Iraq had used the Euro as its oil export currency)
- to ensure the US had military control over the region's hydrocarbon reserves as a lever to control other countries that depend on it
- to assure that the revenue from Iraqi oil would go primarily to American interests
- to lower the price of oil for American consumers
- Defense and construction special interests
- to channel money to defense and construction interests
- Public perception
- to maintain the wartime popularity that the President enjoyed due to his response to the 11 September attacks, and thus distract attention from other domestic political issues on which he was politically vulnerable (in contrast to his father whose wartime popularity quickly faded when the electorate began to focus on the economy)
- Ideological, emotional reasons
- in pursuance of the PNAC's stated strategic goal of "unquestionable [American] geopolitical preeminence"
- a chance for George W. Bush to get revenge against Saddam Hussein for attempting to have his father, President George H. W. Bush, assassinated during a visit to Kuwait in 1993.
- to satisfy and create closure for President George H.W. Bush, Cheney, and other members of the first Bush administration who had been humiliated by the end of the first Gulf War and wanted an opportunity to finally "get" Saddam, after previously failing to do so, even though "getting Saddam" was never a stated objective of the first war.

Weapons of mass destruction

George H. W. Bush. Absence of more substantial proof undermined the credibility of the speech on the international scene. Russian experts questioned the likelihood of such mobile facilities, which are extremely dangerous and difficult to manage.]] Ultimately, the Iraq war was presented as largely being a case of removing banned weapons from Iraq. Administration officials, especially with the United States Department of State led by Colin Powell were eager to make the case for war as universally acceptable to as many nations as possible. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense stated in an interview on 28 May 2003 in Vanity Fair that 'For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction'. [http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s867453.htm] Before the attack, the head UN weapons inspector in Iraq, Hans Blix, clearly stated that his teams had been unable to find any evidence of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons in Iraq. However, the discovery of illegal missiles discovered by United Nations weapons inspectors which were ultimately deemed in violation of United Nations Resolution 687 (1991), called the Al-Samoud IIs, raised serious questions: these rockets could possibly narrowly pass the allowed range of 150 km (93 miles), though without carrying any load. Ultimately though, they were determined to be in violation of the terms to which Saddam Hussein agreed in order to cease the hostilities of the Persian Gulf War and thus, deemed prohibited and ordered destroyed by the United Nations Security Council. Retrospectively, some time after the attack, Hans Blix expressed doubts that the nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons had existed [http://www.randomhouse.com/pantheon/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=0375423028&view=excerpt], [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895882,00.html], but never speculated whether the discovery of the illegal Al-Samoud IIs could be a trigger for justifying war or not. Former top American weapons inspector to Iraq, Scott Ritter, a longtime advocate of more thorough weapons inspections previously and considered an anti-Iraq hardliner, said that he was now absolutely convinced Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction [http://www.news.cornell.edu/Chronicle/03/4.3.03/Ritter_cover.html] which contradicts earlier 1998 statements by Scott Ritter regarding this issue. On August 26 1998, approximately two months prior to United Nations inspectors' ejection from Iraq, Scott Ritter resigned from his position rather than participate in what he called the "illusion of arms control." In his resignation letter to Ambassador Butler, [http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/08/980826-ritter.htm] Ritter wrote: "The Special Commission was created for the purpose of disarming Iraq. As part of the Special Commission team, I have worked to achieve a simple end: the removal, destruction or rendering harmless of Iraq's proscribed weapons. The sad truth is that Iraq today is not disarmed ... UNSCOM has good reason to believe that there are significant numbers of proscribed weapons and related components and the means to manufacture such weapons unaccounted for in Iraq today ... Iraq has lied to the Special Commission and the world since day one concerning the true scope and nature of its proscribed programs and weapons systems. This lie has been perpetuated over the years through systematic acts of concealment. It was for the purpose of uncovering Iraq's mechanism of concealment, and in doing so gaining access to hidden weapons components and weapons programs, that you created a dedicated capability to investigate Iraq's concealment activities, which I have had the privilege to head." Furthermore, on September 7 1998, approximately one month prior to United Nations weapons inspectors' ejection from Iraq, in testimony to the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committee, [http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/ritter.htm] Scott Ritter was asked by John McCain (R, AZ) whether UNSCOM had intelligence suggesting that Iraq had assembled the components for three nuclear weapons and all that it lacked was the fissile material. Ritter replied: "The Special Commission has intelligence information, which suggests that components necessary for three nuclear weapons exists, lacking the fissile material. Yes, sir." As Paul Leventhal, head of the Nuclear Control Institute remarked in response to Ritter's statement,[http://www.nci.org/pr/pr9398.htm] "Iraq could be only days or weeks away from having nuclear weapons if it acquires the needed plutonium or bomb-grade uranium on the black market or by other means." Ritter also said that, absent UNSCOM, Iraq could reconstruct its chemical and biological weapons programs in six months, as well as its missile program. He said that Iraq had a plan for achieving a missile breakout within six months of receiving the signal from Saddam Hussein. It is unclear what Scott Ritter believes happened to that capability he said Saddam Hussein had in 1998 as compared to that capability he believes Saddam Hussein had after the launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom, considering United Nations weapons inspectors were absent from Iraq from 1998 to 2002. No weapons of mass destruction were found by the Iraq Survey Group, headed by inspector David Kay. Kay, who resigned as the Bush administration's top weapons inspector in Iraq, said U.S. intelligence services owed President Bush an explanation for having concluded that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. [http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/25/sprj.nirq.kay/] However, the team claims to have found evidence of low-level WMD programs — a claim hotly disputed by many, with the Biosecurity Journal referring to the Biological Warfare (BW) claims as a "worst case analysis" [http://www.biosecurityjournal.com/PDFs/v1n403/p239_s.pdf]. The Iraq Survey Group under Bush-appointed inspector David Kay reported in the 'Interim Progress Report' on 2003 October 3 the following key points: "We have not yet found stocks of weapons," difficulty in explaining why, clandestine laboratories suitable for "preserving BW expertise" which contained equipment subject to UN monitoring, a prison laboratory complex which Kay describes as "possibly used in human testing of BW agents," strains of bacteria kept in one scientist's home (including a vial of live C. botulinum Okra B), twelve-year-old documents and small parts concerning uranium enrichment found in a scientist's home [http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/21314/newsDate/27-Jun-2003/story.htm], partially declared UAVs, capability to produce a type of fuel useful for Scud missiles, a scientist who had drawn plans for how to make longer-range missiles [http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/7648377.htm], and attempts to acquire missile technology from North Korea, and destroyed documents of unknown significance. [http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html]. The report categorized most biological agents as "BW-applicable" or "BW-capable"; the report mentions nothing that was being used in such a context. Chemical weapons are referred to in a similar fashion. The nuclear program, according to the report, had not done any work since 1991, but had attempted to retain scientists and documentation from it in case sanctions were ever dropped. Kay told the Senate Armed Services Committee during his oral report the following: "Based on the intelligence that existed, I think it was reasonable to reach the conclusion that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Now that you know reality on the ground as opposed to what you estimated before, you may reach a different conclusion — although I must say I actually think what we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place, potentially, than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war." [http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/KAY401A.html] Dr. Kay's team concluded that Iraq had the production capacity and know-how to produce a great deal more chemical and biological weaponry when international economic sanctions were lifted, a policy change which was actively being sought by France, Germany and Russia. Kay also believes that a large but undetermined amount of the former Iraqi government's WMD program had been moved to Syria shortly before the 2003 invasion. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/01/25/wirq25.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/01/25/ixnewstop.html] However, in April 2005, the Iraq Survey Group's final report "found no senior policy, program, or intelligence officials who admitted any direct knowledge of such movement of WMD," and ruled out any government-sanctioned movement of banned weapons to Syria. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501554_pf.html] The current consensus view of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction seems similar to that portrayed by Hussein Kamel in 1995 and that of Imad Khadduri [http://www.iraqsnuclearmirage.com/]: that Iraq had almost completely destroyed its programs, but sought to retain as much knowledge and information as it could so that, should sanctions ever end, the programs could start over quickly. As of May 2005, small quantities of chemically degraded mustard gas had been found in old munitions. However, these are generally regarded as left-overs from the pre-sanction era before the 1991 Gulf War. The general consensus is that the intelligence community, including the CIA and other foreign services, failed to provide an accurate picture of the WMD program in Iraq under Saddam Hussein. The U.S. government and the Bush administration have not yet taken official stances on the intelligence failures, but Congressional investigations, primarily under Democratic leadership, were either underway or forming in the spring of 2005. The United Nations announced a report on March 2, 2004 from the weapons inspection teams stating that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction of any significance after 1994. [http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+U.N.%3A+Iraq+had+no+WMD+after+1994&expire=&urlID=9464809&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Firaq%2F2004-03-02-un-wmd_x.htm&partnerID=1660] In a June 2004 interview with Time Magazine, former president Bill Clinton said, "I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over." He added that he supported the invasion because "there was a lot of stuff unaccounted for." [http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/index.html] On August 2, 2004 President Bush stated "Knowing what I know today we still would have gone on into Iraq. He had the capability of making weapons of mass destruction. He had terrorists ties … the decision I made is the right decision. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power."[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5578293/] On October 6, 2004 Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, appearing before the United States Senate Armed Services Committee announced that the group found no evidence that Iraq under Saddam Hussein had produced any weapons of mass destruction since 1991, when UN sanctions were imposed and furthermore, Iraq had been incapable of doing so. The report noted that Saddam had made it his primary goal to have sanctions lifted by whatever means necessary and that whether or not Saddam Hussein was, indeed, "contained" was questionable considering dozens of instances in which prohibited material had entered Iraq through several nefarious means such as front companies and other questionable means. From the report: "[Saddam] wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted."[http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/] The report concluded in its Key Findings that: "The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions. Neither was there an identifiable group of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam. Instead, his lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long association with Saddam and his infrequent, but firm, verbal comments and directions to them." [http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf] (PDF) It also noted that "Iran was the pre-eminent motivator of [Iraq's WMD revival] policy. All senior level Iraqi officials considered Iran to be Iraq’s principal enemy in the region. The wish to balance Israel and acquire status and influence in the Arab world were also considerations, but secondary." In March of 2005 there was an addition to Duelfer's Report titled Addendums to the Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq's WMD [http://www.gpoaccess.gov/duelfer/] In it Charles Duelfer made the statement that "Whether Syria received military items from Iraq for safekeeping or other reasons has yet to be determined. There was evidence of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initiated by a Syrian security officer, and ISG received information about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved. In the judgment of the working group, these reports were sufficiently credible to warrant further investigation. ... ISG was unable to complete its investigation and is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was evacuated to Syria before the war. It should be noted that no information from debriefing of Iraqis in custody supports this possibility. ... Based on the evidence available at present, ISG judged that it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from Iraq to Syria took place. However, ISG was unable to rule out unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials." [http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/DuelferRpt/Addendums.pdf] On January 12, 2005, US military forces, having located no weapons of mass destruction, formally abandoned the search. But just because we don't see things as we expect them does not mean they are not there. We didn't find any big bombs waiting to be used against America. But, the military has uncovered many large caches of chemical and biological warfare equipment and items to be used by Iraqi soldiers. It was plainly obvious by what was found that the Iraqis were prepared not for US use of chemical weapons, since the US has renounced use of chemicals and has been destroying its own chemical weapons. They were prepared for use of chemical and biological weapons by their own (Iraqi) forces. The Coalition military forces could go where inspectors could not, and have found things that were impossible foe inspectors to find. On June 8, 2005, retired 4-star general and former Secretary of State in the Bush administration Colin Powell, appeared on The Daily Show and stated regarding Weapons of Mass Destructions in Iraq: "Now where we got the intelligence wrong, dead wrong, is that we thought he also had existing stockpiles, and now we know that those are not there." [http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=15572&poppedFrom=_shows_the_daily_show_videos_celebrity_interviews_index.jhtml&] [http://www.lies.com/wp/2005/06/11/colin-powell-on-the-daily-show/] On August 21, 2005, CNN aired a special presentation titled, 'Dead Wrong:' Inside an Intelligence Meltdown[http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/presents/index.dead.wrong.html]. The presentation featured clips of pre-war speeches, interviews with important people involved in this matter and received high ratings[http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/for_david_ensor_dead_wrong_seemed_like_a_worthwhile_project_24874.asp][http://www.turnerinfo.com/newsitem.aspx?P=CNN&CID01=60d2ed9b-df5d-4983-97de-0616b2333afc][http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/cnn/viewers_tune_in_and_respond_to_cnns_dead_wrong_documentary_24953.asp]. Former head of the Iraq Survey Group David Kay was also interviewed and stated: "We can't afford to be wrong a second time. How many people in the world are going to believe us when we say it's a "slam dunk," to use George Tenet's terms? Iran has nuclear weapons. The answer is going to be, you said that before."[http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0508/21/cp.01.html]

Sanctions

However effective, UN sanctions fostered a growing humanitarian crisis in Iraq. International popular opinion seemed to shift in favour of lifting the sanctions and finding diplomatic alternatives such as targeted sanctions that might be as effective, but which would not inadvertently affect the Iraqi populace. Temporary solutions, such as the Oil for Food program, an easing of the sanctions on a controlled basis, had limited success in the face of corruption in the Iraqi government and UN officials involved in the program [http://www.iic-offp.org/documents/InterimReportFeb2005.pdf]. Essentially, harsh sanctions originally intended to be temporary could not be kept in place indefinitely. In addition, Saddam's persistent efforts to sway certain UN Security Council members with money diverted from the Oil for Food program meant that sanctions may have reached the limit of their usefulness.[http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm][http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/06/woil06.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/10/06/ixportaltop.html]

Human Rights

Another key rationale for the war was ending Saddam Hussein's nearly 40-year track record of murder, torture, and other major human rights abuses (see Human rights in Saddam's Iraq). Some critics called this justification self-serving, since the US government did not do much to prevent or to punish those crimes while they were happening. Not that they would have been able to anyway. Although the use of chemical weapons against Kurds in 1983 was known by US intelligence, Donald Rumsfeld, at the time presidential envoy of Ronald Reagan, nevertheless spoke of his "close relationship" with Saddam Hussein and even visited him. After the Persian Gulf War the US government encouraged rebellions by the Shiites but did not intervene when Saddam crushed the rebels. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,866942,00.html] [http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3294143/] Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch has argued that the justification of "human rights" for the war in Iraq does not meet appropriate standards for the level of suffering that it causes.[http://hrw.org/wr2k4/3.htm#_Toc58744952] Colin Powell's former Chief of Staff Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson discussed the US human rights situation in post-invasion Iraq and Afghanistan, stating in an [http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11111.htm interview] with Amy Goodman on Nov 22 2005 that: :"the difficulties [our troops face] come from the two decisions that I had the most insight into that were made in this more or less alternative decision-making process. And those two decisions were the inept and incompetent planning for post-invasion Iraq, and [...] the decision... from that alternative decision-making process to depart from the Geneva Conventions and from international law, in general" :"[The President's memorandum said] the spirit of Geneva would be adhered to... consistent with military necessity. [...] It did not say 'consistent with national security demands.' It did not say 'consistent with the demands of the war on terror.' It said 'consistent with military needs.' Now, military needs are very simple and clear to a man like me who spent 31 years in the military. It means that if one of my buddy's life is threatened or my life is threatened, I can take drastic action. I can even shoot a detainee. And I can expect not to be punished under Geneva, or at least if I am court-martialed, I have a defense. It doesn't mean that I can take a detainee in a cold, dark cell in Bagram, Afghanistan, for example, in December 2002, shackled to the wall, and pour cold water on him at intervals when the outside temperature is 50 degrees anyway, and eventually kill him, which is what happened."

Libyan disarmament

Also included in the list of postwar justifications is Libya's agreement to abandon its WMD programs in December of 2003. Those who argue that this action was directly inspired by the invasion of Iraq point to a phone call Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi says he had with Libya's leader, Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi in April of 2003, in which he quotes Qadaffi as saying "I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid." [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/09/04/wun04.xml] Negotiations between Libya and the United States and Britain on disarmament began almost immediately thereafter. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A15868-2003Dec19¬Found=true] On the other hand, Flynt Leverett (former senior director for Middle Eastern Affairs at the NSC) and Martin S. Indyk (former Clinton administration official) argue that the agreement was instead a result of good-faith negotiations. Libya had in principle agreed to surrender its programs in 1999.

Purported links between the government of Iraq and terrorist organizations

Al-Qaeda

Saddam Hussein's regime had some contacts with terrorist organizations in the past. The Bush Administration mentioned these contacts frequently in the run-up to the war, even suggesting direct ties to al-Qaeda. Some even alleged that Saddam supported the attacks of 9/11, but this view that has not been confirmed by the evidence. And, according to the U.S. Intelligence Community's Kerr Group report of July 29, 2004, despite "a 'purposely aggressive approach' in conducting exhaustive and repetitive searches for such links... [the U.S.] Intelligence Community remained firm in its assessment that no operational or collaborative relationship existed."[http://irrationallyinformed.com//pdfcollection/20040729_Kerr_Report.pdf] Some newspapers in 1998 reported an "alliance" or "pact" between Saddam and al-Qaeda [http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/850ikvwv.asp?pg=2]. In January 1999, Newsweek magazine also reported statements by a Saudi intelligence officer that Saddam and al-Qaeda had formed an alliance. Network news organizations also picked up the story.[http://www.mediaresearch.org/rm/cyber/2004/binladen061704/segment1.ram] But by 2003 most news organizations were extremely skeptical of such claims; certainly no evidence of any "alliance" or "pact" ever emerged in the mainstream press. One January 2003 article in the San Jose Mercury News said the claim "stretches the analysis of U.S. intelligence agencies to, and perhaps beyond, the limit." [http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/5055588.htm] After the invasion, in January of 2004, Secretary Powell stated "I have not seen [a] smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I think the possibility of such connections did exist, and it was prudent to consider them at the time that we did." But by September 2005 Secretary Powell, when asked if there was any connection between Saddam Hussein and the attacks of 9/11, said "I have never seen a connection. I can't think otherwise, because I've never seen any evidence to suggest there was one."[20/20 Interview (9 September 2005)]. Various independent investigations into the question of an al-Qaeda connection by U.S. intelligence agencies including the CIA, FBI, and NSA concluded that there was no evidence of cooperation between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Some unspecified information once perceived as "evidence" for a connection between the two turns out to have been disinformation coming from several sources, most notably an associate of Ahmed Chalabi who was given the code name "Curveball", and from captured al Qaeda leader Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. The Chalabi source has been thoroughly discredited, and the al Qaeda source has since recanted his story. Other al Qaeda leaders have claimed that there was no operational relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, and indeed that Osama bin Laden had forbidden such a relationship with the Iraqi leader, whom he considered an infidel. Some support for claims of collaboration between al Qaeda and the now deposed Iraqi government have come from weapons smuggler Mohamed Mansour Shahab, who said in an interview in the New Yorker magazine that he had been directed by the Iraqi intelligence community to organize, plan, and carry out up to nine terrorist attacks against American targets in the Middle East, including an attack similar to the one carried out on the USS Cole. [http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0403/p01s01-wome.html]. Reporter Guy Dinmore questions his credibility however, writing in the London Financial Times: "it is apparent that the man is deranged. He claims to have killed 422 people, including two of his wives, and says he would drink the blood of his victims. He also has no explanation for why, although he was arrested two years ago, he only revealed his alleged links to al-Qaeda and Baghdad after the September 11 attacks." (22 May 2002 p. 13) Al Qaeda expert Jason Burke wrote after interviewing Shahab, "Shahab is a liar. He may well be a smuggler, and probably a murderer too, but substantial chunks of his story simply are not true."[http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,892161,00.html]. The only member of the original plot to destroy the World Trade Center to escape US law enforcement officials, the Iraqi Abdul Rahman Yasin, fled to Baghdad shortly after the attacks in 1993. Abdul Rahman Yasin was the only alleged member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large after the investigation into the bombing where he fled to Iraq. After major fighting ceased U.S. forces discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, that allegedly show that the Iraqi government gave Yasin a house and monthly salary. [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-09-17-iraq-wtc_x.htm] FBI and CIA investigations in 1995 and 1996 concluded "that the Iraqi government was in no way involved in the attack"; then-U.S. counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has since testified, "the fact that one of the 12 people involved in the attack was Iraqi hardly seems to me as evidence that the Iraqi government was involved in the attack. The attack was Al Qaeda; not Iraq.... [T]he allegation that has been made that the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center was done by the Iraqi government I think is absolutely without foundation." (911 Commission Hearing, 24 March 2004)[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20349-2004Mar24.html] Abbas al-Janabi, who served for fifteen years as personal assistant to Uday Hussein before defecting to United Kingdom, has often claimed that he knew of collaboration between the former Iraqi government and al Qaeda. Al-Janabi said that he had learned that Iraqi officials had visited Afghanistan and Sudan to strengthen ties with Al-Qaeda and he also claimed he knew of a facility near Baghdad where foreign fighters were trained and instructed by members of the Republican Guard and Mukhabarat. [http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_15-7-2002_pg4_1]. Salman Pak, a facility matching al-Janabi’s description, was captured by US Marines in Mid April of 2003 [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,84291,00.html], but no evidence of al Qaeda presence at the camp has been found. Some claim that the camp was actually a counterterrorism facility built by the British in the mid 1980's but UN weapons inspectors, including Charles Duelfer believed it had been converted from its original purpose and was being used to train militants. [http://www.cjr.org/issues/2004/4/mccollam-list.asp] Inconsistencies in the stories of the Iraqi defectors have led U.S. officials, journalists, and investigators to conclude that the Salman Pak story was inaccurate. Al-Janabi and other Iraqi defectors who tell this story are associated with the Iraqi National Congress, an organization that has been accused of deliberately supplying false information to the US government in order to build support for regime change ([http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0316-02.htm]). "The INC’s agenda was to get us into a war," said Helen Kennedy of the New York Daily News. "The really damaging stories all came from those guys, not the CIA. They did a really sophisticated job of getting it out there."[http://www.cjr.org/issues/2004/4/mccollam-list.asp] One senior U.S. official said that they had found "nothing to substantiate" the claim that al-Qaeda trained at Salman Pak.[http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/special_packages/iraq/intelligence/11893057.htm] In April of 2001, the Czech Security Information Service reported a meeting between Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir Al-Ani, an Iraqi Intelligence Service officer operating out of the Iraqi embassy in Prague, and a man they believed to be Mohamed Atta. The Czech report was based on a single eyewitness from Prague who is now generally considered unreliable. Nevertheless, this Prague connection was seen as a crucial link between Iraq and al Qaeda by proponents of collaboration between Iraq and al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission examined this evidence, saying that circumstantial evidence appeared to place Atta in Florida at the time, and that "The available evidence does not support the original Czech report of an Atta-Ani meeting." The report concluded, "Based on the evidence available including investigation by Czech and U.S. authorities plus detainee reporting we do not believe that such a meeting occurred." It also says that Czech intelligence indicates that al-Ani "was about 70 miles away from Prague" at the time that the meeting supposedly took place. [http://www.factcheck.org/article203.html], [http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch7.htm] The Senate Report concludes that, while representatives of Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda had indeed met, an operational relationship was never realized and there was a deep sense of mistrust and dislike of one another. Osama Bin Laden was shown to view Iraq's ruling Ba'ath party as running contrary to his religion, calling it an "apostate regime." A British intelligence report [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2727471.stm] went so far as to say of Bin Laden "His aims are in ideological conflict with present day Iraq." The state-run Iraqi local paper Al-Nasiriya published an opinion piece praising Osama bin Laden that Senator Ernest Hollings interpreted as foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Senator Hollings read the opinion piece into the Congressional Record. [http://www.uscg.mil/Legal/Homeland_legislation/Text/091202%20Homeland%20Security.txt] Nobody has offered any evidence that such "foreknowledge," if it existed at all on the part of the article's author, extended to Saddam's regime. Neither the 9/11 Commission Report nor the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq found this article worth mention. In 2004, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission, concluded that there was no evidence of a "collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda at the time of the September 11, 2001 attacks. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54702-2004Jun19.html] This conclusion was consistent with the conclusions of all agencies of the U.S. intelligence community, according to documents released in 2005. Senator Carl Levin wrote that the documents "are additional compelling evidence that the Intelligence Community did not believe there was a cooperative relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, despite public comments by the highest ranking officials in our government to the contrary."[http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=236440]

Other terrorist organizations

Aside from the contentious allegations of Iraq's relationship with al Qaeda, the former government did have relationships with other militant organizations in the Middle East including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It is known that some $10–15M total was paid to the families of suicide bombers, presented as compensation for the demolition of their homes in Israeli collective punishment operations. Abu Abbas (associate with the PLO and the Achille Lauro hijacking) was found in Iraq, and had been wanted for quite some time. In August 2002, Abu Nidal (attacks in Italy and elsewhere) died in Baghdad from gunshot wounds while facing treason charges under Saddam's government. In 1998, Iraq plotted to blow up Radio Free Europe in Prague, for broadcasting opposition communications into Iraq. According to Jabir Salim, the consul and second secretary at the Iraq embassy in Prague, Saddam Hussein had allocated $150,000 to recruit and train individuals who would not be traceable back to Iraq. This plot was aborted in December 1998 when Salim defected in Prague, revealing details of the plot to the CIA, British MI-6 and Czech intelligence. The now deposed Iraqi regime has also been accused of an assassination plot on former President George Bush. On April 14, 1993, it is charged that Iraq plotted to assassinate former President George Bush while he was visiting Kuwait. The assassins were Ra'ad al-Asadi and Wali al-Ghazali, two Iraqi nationals, who had been supplied with a car bomb. The plot was foiled when the two were captured in Kuwait City. The FBI learned that the two had been recruited by the Iraqi intelligence Service in Basra, Iraq, who also gave them the explosive devices shortly before Bush arrived in Kuwait. Some documents indicate that the leadership was attempting to dis