Iran Iraq War 1980-1988

1

IRANIRAQ WAR 1980-1988[1]

INTRODUCTION

On 22nd September 1980 Sadamm Hussein launched what was to become the longest conventional war in 20th century, a real war of attrition, the Iraq-Iran war.

On August 20th, 1988, some eight years later, and only after an Iranian offensive on the Kurdish town in North Iraq called Halabja, to which Hussein responded with an aerial bombardment of poison gas, killing 5,000 of its own Iraqi civiliians, a UN sponsored cease-fire took place.

THE COURSE OF THE WAR

Iraq soon occupied 10,000 square miles of Iranian territory along the 375 mile front.However, the Iranians, inspired by revolutionary patriotism fought back and by May 1982, Iran had retaken the ground lost by the initial Iraqi attack.

From then on, until its end in 1988, this war was fought on Iraqi soil.

Iran’s airstrikes crippled the ports ofBasra and those in Iraq’s southern oil fields. They also damaged the Iraqi oil fields of the North. By 1984 the shipping lanes of the Persian Gulf were absorbed into this war, with Iraq attacking oil tankers bound for Iranian ports.

It was similar to World War 1 in that invovled trench warfare, as well as the use of poison gas and chemical weapons.[2]

Why is it that two countries who 5 years earlier in 1975, had signed the Algiers Agreement, end up at war with each other in 1980? And what were the consequences of this war, for both Iran, Iraq, the Middle East region and indeed the world?

PART I

CAUSES OF THE IRAN-IRAQ WAR 1980-1988

This war can be explained in terms of 4 main causal factors:

(1)a number of domestic issues with which Hussein was faced.

(2)Husseins’s own political ambitions in the Middle East,

(3)religious reasons,

(4)the role of international pressures

The following explanation will try to cover these four main causal factors by breaking them down into various immediate, shorter-term and long term causes.

IMMEDIATE GEO-POLITICAL CAUSES

Tensions and sisputes over various aspects of the frontiers and navigation rights between the two countries (which one could argue go back to the British Mandate and the establishment of Iraq).

Particularly prominent in this dispute was Iraq’s northern border (especially since the insurrection of the Kurds against Hussein during the Iranian revolution.)

Indeed, Iraq claimed that Iran, in keeping her borders open to fleeing Kurds, was breaking the Algiers agreement of 1975.

There was also a dispute over ,the Shatt-el-Arab waterway.

But these border disputes had a long history, and so can be called a long term geo-political cause.

For example, in December 1959, the new leader of Iraq Abdul Karim Qassim, was complaining that the Ottomans had handed this region toIran.

In 1971, Iraq broke diplomatic relations with Iran after claiming sovereignty rights over the islands of Abu Musa, Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb in the Persian Gulf, following the withdrawal of the British, but this did not lead to war.

So we still have to explain why did Sadam Hussein invaded Iran when he did?

SHORT TERM SOCIAL CAUSE

In addition, Hussein also thought Iran was encouraging Kurdish uprising. They had certainly taken advantage of the Iranian Revolution to recommence their armed uprising againt Sadam Hussein’s regime, and it is indisputable that the new Islamic Iranin government allowed fleeing Kurds to come into Iran.

Another shorter term cause could be said to have been religious.

SHORT TERM RELIGIOUS CAUSE

In 1979 Iran underwent a revolution, a profoundly and total change of regime. The Shah of Iran was overthrown and replaced by the religious leader, the Ayatollah Khomeini. This Iranian Revolution and it made Iran what it is today, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As a result, the two states who had signed the Algiers Agreement now had very different, and indeed antagonist ideas about the role of nationalism and religion in public life, and that agreement seemed more and more like a fragile layer of varnish.

Khomeini, had a fundamentalist and very ‘militant Shi’a vision of Islam, which he wanted to spread the Islamic revolution across the Middle East. Suddenly, the Algiers Agreement looked like a thin veener in which cracks began to appear.

Saddam was certainly worried about Islamic fundamentalism as championed by the new Islamic Republic. His regime was Sunni dominated. But there was a large Shi’ite minority.Hussein suppressed some Shi’a uprisings in Iraq in 1980. Khomeini’s response was to say “the people and army of Iraq must turn their backs on th Ba’th regime and overthrow it.’Khomeini’s request that the Shi’a of Iraq overthrow Hussein was in part driven by universalist principles of Islam against Ba’th’s secular nationalism.

LONG TERM CULTURAL CAUSE

Beneath this one might wish to look for longer standing underlying causes, such as the long term cultural rivalry between Arab and Persian civilisations. However, this is not a strong argument. They had lived together long enough in this rivalry not to be permanently at war over it. Moreover, it does not really explain why the war happened when and in the way it did.

IMMEDIATE AND SHORT TERM POLITICAL CAUSE

In terms of political causes internal to Iraq, one might argue that it was undertaken as a way of unifying the Iraqis. (which in term might be seen, in part, as providing a diversion from various domestic issues, in particular the low standard of living of the vast majority of the population. To a certain extent, like the Flaklands/Malvinas war, it was a classic ‘war of distraction’ on both sides.

In addition to that, Hussein certainly hoped to make Iraq the main power in the Middle East, a plan potentially threatened by the prospect of the consolidation of a stable, very rich and very powerful Islamic Republic in the Middle East.

Hussein’s attack on Iran was driven by his ambition to make Iraq the major Arab power in the Middle East – as Nasser had made Egypt the main power in the 1950s and 1960s.

Iraq, with the rise of the Ba'ath Party, (advocating the related concepts of Arab nationalism, Pan-Arabism, and Arab socialism – invented by Michel Aflaq),was hoping to take on the role of "leader of the Arab world". They were encouraging Arabs to revolt against the Shah of Iran.

However, the most obvious and prominent political cause of this war was the political opportunism on the part of Hussein. Still nursing its wounds from the 1979 revolution, Iran was temporarily weak. Unlike the mighty military machine constructed by the Shah, the new regime had reduced spending on the military, and Hussein thought he could topple the Iranian regime before it consolidated its power. For if it managed to achieve this then it would be a Shi’te dominated IslmaicRepublic which might become the main power in the Middle East.

The answer to that question points towards another cause – opportunism on the part of Saddam Hussein. Compared to Iran, Iraq’s military power was not as capable. Throughout the 1970s the Shah of Iran had the funds he was receiving from the rise in oil prices which he had helped bring about in the 1970S to build up Iran’s military into one of the largest and best equipped armies in the world. However, in 1980, Iran’s military was still destabilised by revolution, and her economy was still weak. It is this which, in part, explains why Hussein invade when he did. This helped increase Hussein’s confidence of easy victory which helped him take this decision and helped him achieve domestic support for it.

If all of this constitutes the trigger, then that still leaves open the question of the underlyingcauses?

THE MAJOR, EXTERNAL POLITICAL CAUSE:

But whilst this political opportunism on the part of Hussein goes a long way in expalining this war, the causes of this war cannot be understood without an awareness of the main driving force behind Hussein’s actions at this time: the fact that an attack on Iran by Iraq was in the interests of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, other smaller Gulf States, and, above all, the USA.

Whilst the Soviets were Iraq’s major supplier, they were not alone. The West also supplied him. For example he received French Mirage Jets with exocet missiles. Moreover, the emertging interests of the Usa which is behind all this from the start can be seen more clearly as one moves through the war. For example, in 1984 Diplomatic relations with Washington (severed since 1967) were restored. Indeed, by 1987 US was sometimes directly involved against Iran. The USA ignored Husayns atrocities in order to concentrate on stopping the spread of Khomeini’s Islamic radicalism and anti-US sentiment. Indeed, US involvement in this war played an important role in persuading Iran’s leaders to end the war.

This raises the question why?

THE MAIN ECONOMIC CAUSES

At this point, all can be brought into line with a fundamental economic cause to this war: access to oil fields. Not only for Iraq. For the US it was all about oil reserves. For if Iraq lost, most of the oil, the states of the Middle East would come under Iranian influence.

PART II

CONSEQUENCES OF THE IRAN-IRAQ WAR 1980-1988

IMMEDIATE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES

One immediate social consequence was the death of about half a million soldiers and civilians from both sides.Figures differ. But it was at least

Iran dead 262,000

Iraq dead 105,000

SHORT TERM SOCIAL EFFECT

It can be said that the war managed to solidify some sort of Iraqi identity amongst the majority of its inhabitants – the Kurds apart.

It led to the militarisation of Iraqi society. Army grew from 190,000 to 1 million..

The war also intensified Hussayns personality cult.

Iraqi joke about 28 million in the population, 14 million Iraqis and 14 statues of Saddam.

Iraqi national identity sentiments become solidified (Kurds apart).

His policiy toxards to Shias was contradictory. Concerned about the loyalty of them he beldned conciliation with repression. In terms of conciliation, Hussayn made more concessions to the Shi’as by giving more of them positions high up in the Ba’ath party and armed forces, and to the same aim, Hussein’s image became more Shi’a friendly and Muslim

This helped him ensure that most Iraqi Shi’as sided with their Arab identity over their Muslim identity during the war and so showed no desire to be dominated by Iran.

IMMEDIATE AND LONG TERM ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES

IRAQ

Economic impact on Iraq was devastating: Basra port was destroyed; civilian development projects abandoned; introduction of austerity measures; huge financial debt (80 billion$, mainly owed to Arab Gulf States.) So the money for reconstruction was used to service this debt.

It closed the Alshabat waterway to all shipping.

As the war also invovled a huge financial expenditure, it had serious economic consequences.Iraq had needed to borrow money to pay for the war, between 50-60 billion dollars worth from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Moreover the rearmament programme was given priority over reconstruction. Whilst this led to the development od a small armaments industry, it affected Iraq’s ability to meets its debts and recover economically.

SHORT AND LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

The attack on the oil fields also had a serious environmental cost.

IMMEDIATE AND SHORT TERM POLITICAL

In Iran: Khomeini ‘s government was strengthened.

In Iraq: Hussayn kept his grip on power. It was not seen as a huge defeat.

LONG TERM GEO-POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES

Nothing had changed.

Border dispute remained until 1990 when Husayn tried to restore the Algiers Agreement.

Another consequence was, ironically, the lack of clearvictory. Despite 8 years of intense and ferocious fighting, in the end the actual borders between Iran and Iraqdid not change, nor was there any negotiated reparations

One might see this as a long term casue of the First Gulf War, for, in addition to what he borrowed to pay for this war, it was the 10 billion that Hussein spent on military equipment between 1988-89 that led him to seek economic recovery through the annexation of Kuwait in 1990 and thus a long term effect of this war being the Gulf War.

It could even be argued that one long term consequence of both the lack of clear victory as well as the cost was the creation of permanent instability in the area as well as contributing to to Saddam.s decision to invade Kuwait in 1990 and so launch Gulf War, and the present, extremely unstable situation in Iraq and in US-Iran relations today.

III

IB QUESTIONS ON THE IRAN –IRAQ WAR

(i)

Examine the causes and consequences of the Iran–Iraq war 1980–1988.

As one must “use the question to structure one’s answer”, half of this essay will deal with the causes, and half will dlea with the consequences.

(ii)

Assess the importance of domestic factors in Saddam Hussein’s decision to invade Iran in 1980.

This essay will be just about causes.

(iii)

The outcome of the Iran-Iraq war (1980 to 1988) failed to resolve the issues whichcaused it. Assess the validity of this statement.

This essay will be just about the consequences.

MISC

Kherwan, a native of Halabja, still remembers the sound and smell of bombs and artillery shells that were packed with lethal chemical agents.
Kherwan: It was a beautiful spring day. As the clock approached 11:00 in the morning, I felt a strange sensation; my heart convulsed as if it were telling me that we were on the verge of a major calamity. Within minutes, artillery rounds began to explode in Halabja and planes began dropping bombs on the town. The bombing was concentrated on the northern neighborhoods, we ran and hid in our basement. At 2 o'clock in the afternoon, as the intensity of the bombing wound down, I carefully sneaked out of the basement to the kitchen and carried food to my family. When the bombing stopped, we began to hear noises that sounded like metal pieces falling on the ground. But I didn’t find an explanation.
I saw things that I won't forget for as long as I live. It started with a loud strange noise that sounded like bombs exploding, and a man came running into our house, shouting, "Gas! Gas!" We hurried into our car and closed its windows. I think the car was rolling over the bodies of innocent people. I saw people lying on the ground, vomiting a green-colored liquid, while others became hysterical and began laughing loudly before falling motionless onto the ground. Later, I smelled an aroma that reminded me of apples and I lost consciousness. When I awoke, were hundreds of bodies scattered around me. After that I took shelter again in a nearby basement and the area was engulfed by an ugly smell. It was similar to rotting garbage, but then it changed to a sweet smell similar to that of apples. Then I smelled something that was like eggs. Some time later, I discovered that the Iraqi air force had bombed Halabja with chemical weapons.
When you hear people shouting the words "gas" or "chemicals" -- and you hear those shouts spreading among the people -- that is when terror begins to take hold, especially among the children and the women. Your loved ones, your friends, you see them walking and then falling like leaves to the ground. It is a situation that cannot be described -- birds began falling from their nests; then other animals, then humans. It was total annihilation. Whoever was able to walk out of the town, left on foot. Whoever had a car, left by car. But whoever had too many children to carry on their shoulders, they stayed in the town and succumbed to the gas.

Twenty years ago, on 16 March 1988, Iraqi bombers dropped chemical agents on the town of Halabja in Iraqi Kurdistan, killing several thousand civilians. The attack laid the precedent for the tactical use of poison-gas against the Kurdish countryside on the first day of every stage of a five-month counter-insurgency campaign that followed shortly afterwards (this was codenamed Anfal, an Arabic word meaning "spoils of war").

[1]TOK issue: Language In Iran, this war known as the Imposed War ( Jang-e-tahmīlī) and Holy Defense ( Defā'-e-moghaddas).In Iraq, it is known as Saddām's Qādisiyyah ( Qādisiyyat Saddām) as well the First Gulf War (the 1990 - 1991 Persian Gulf War being the Second Gulf War). In our books it is called The Iran-Iraq War.Which one of these descriptions is most just? Most objective?

[2]