Domestic Issues In the Middle East 2

 Iraq: ‘Transitioning’ - From US Occupation to Sovereign Independence

- The Iraq War was a protracted armed conflict that began in 2003 with the invasion of
Iraq by a United States-led coalition that overthrew the government of Saddam
Hussein.
- The conflict continued for much of the next decade as an insurgency emerged to
oppose the occupying forces and the post-invasion Iraqi government.
- An estimated 151,000 to 1,033,000 Iraqis were killed in the first three to four years of
conflict. US troops were officially withdrawn in 2011.
- However, following the spread of the Syrian Civil War and the territorial gains of
the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), the Obama administration decided
to redeploy US forces to Iraq in 2014.
- The U.S. became re-involved in 2014 at the head of a new coalition; the insurgency
and many dimensions of the civil armed conflict continue. The invasion occurred as
part of the George W. Bush administration's War on Terror, following the September
11 attacks with direct authorisation of the US congress that was passed in October
2002.
- The Iraq War began on 20 March 2003, when the U.S., joined by the U.K. and several
coalition allies, launched a "shock and awe" bombing campaign.
- Iraqi forces were quickly overwhelmed as coalition forces swept through the country.
The invasion led to the collapse of the Ba'athist government; Saddam Hussein was
captured during Operation Red Dawn in December of that same year and executed
three years later.
- The power vacuum following Saddam's demise and the mismanagement by
the Coalition Provisional Authority led to widespread civil
war between Shias and Sunnis, as well as a lengthy insurgency against coalition
forces.
- Many of the violent insurgent groups were supported by Iran and al-Qaeda in Iraq.
The United States responded with a build-up of 170,000 troops in 2007.
- This build-up gave greater control to Iraq's government and military, and was judged
a success by many.
- In 2008, President Bush agreed to a withdrawal of all U.S. combat troops from Iraq.
The withdrawal was completed under President Barack Obama in December 2011.
- The Bush administration based its rationale for the Iraq War principally on the
assertion that Iraq, which had been viewed by the U.S. as a "rogue state" since the
1990–1991 Gulf War, supposedly possessed an active weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) program, and that the Iraqi government posed a threat to the
United States and its coalition allies.
- Some U.S. officials falsely accused Saddam of harbouring and supporting al-
Qaeda, while others cited the desire to end a repressive dictatorship and bring
democracy to the people of Iraq.
- In 2004, the 9/11 Commission said there was no evidence of an operational
relationship between the Saddam Hussein regime and al-Qaeda. No stockpiles of
WMDs or an active WMD program were ever found in Iraq.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - Bush administration officials made numerous assertions about a purported Saddam-al-
Qaeda relationship and WMDs that were based on sketchy evidence, and which
intelligence officials rejected.
- The rationale of U.S. pre-war intelligence faced heavy criticism both domestically and
internationally. The Chilcot Report, a British inquiry into its decision to go to war,
was published in 2016 and concluded military action may have been necessary but
was not the last resort at the time and that the consequences of invasion were
underestimated.
- When interrogated by the FBI, Saddam Hussein admitted to having kept up the
appearance of possessing weapons of mass destruction in order to appear strong in
front of Iran. He also confirmed that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction
prior to the U.S. invasion.
- In the aftermath of the invasion, Iraq held multi-party elections in 2005. Nouri al-
Maliki became Prime Minister in 2006 and remained in office until 2014. The al-
Maliki government enacted policies that were widely seen as having the effect of
alienating the country's previously dominant Sunni minority and
worsening sectarian tensions.
- In the summer of 2014, the ISIL launched a military offensive in northern Iraq and
declared a worldwide Islamic caliphate, leading to Operation Inherent Resolve,
another military response from the United States and its allies.
- The Iraq War caused at least one hundred thousand civilian deaths, as well as tens of
thousands of military deaths. The majority of deaths occurred as a result of the
insurgency and civil conflicts between 2004 and 2007.
- Subsequently, the 2014–2017 War in Iraq, which is considered a domino effect of the
invasion, caused at least 67,000 civilian deaths, in addition to the displacement of five
million people within the country.
Pre-war events
- After 9/11, the Bush Administration national security team actively debated an
invasion of Iraq.
- President Bush began laying the public groundwork for an invasion of Iraq in January
2002 State of the Union address, calling Iraq a member of the Axis of Evil, and saying
"The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to
threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."
- Key U.S. allies in NATO, such as the United Kingdom, agreed with the US actions,
while France and Germany were critical of plans to invade Iraq, arguing instead for
continued diplomacy and weapons inspections. After considerable debate, the UN
Security Council adopted a compromise resolution, UN Security Council Resolution
1441, which authorized the resumption of weapons inspections and promised "serious
consequences" for non-compliance.
- Security Council members France and Russia made clear that they did not consider
these consequences to include the use of force to overthrow the Iraqi government. The
US and UK ambassadors to the UN publicly confirmed this reading of the resolution.
- Resolution 1441 set up inspections by the United Nations Monitoring, Verification
and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 Agency. Saddam accepted the resolution on 13 November and inspectors returned to
Iraq under the direction of UNMOVIC chairman Hans Blix and IAEA Director
General Mohamed ElBaradei.
- As of February 2003, the IAEA "found no evidence or plausible indication of the
revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq"; the IAEA concluded that certain items
which could have been used in nuclear enrichment centrifuges, such as aluminum
tubes, were in fact intended for other uses. In March 2003, Blix said progress had
been made in inspections, and no evidence of WMD had been found.
- In October 2002, the US Congress passed the "Iraq Resolution", which authorized the
President to "use any means necessary" against Iraq. Americans polled in January
2003 widely favored further diplomacy over an invasion.
- Later that year, however, Americans began to agree with Bush's plan. The US
government engaged in an elaborate domestic public relations campaign to market the
war to its citizens. Americans overwhelmingly believed Saddam did have weapons of
mass destruction: 85% said so, even though the inspectors had not uncovered those
weapons. By February 2003, 64% of Americans supported taking military action to
remove Saddam from power.
- In March 2003, the United States, the United Kingdom, Poland, Australia, Spain,
Denmark, and Italy began preparing for the invasion of Iraq with a host of public
relations and military moves. In an address to the nation on 17 March 2003, Bush
demanded that Saddam and his two sons, Uday and Qusay, surrender and leave Iraq,
giving them a 48-hour deadline.
- The UK House of Commons held a debate on going to war on 18 March 2003 where
the government motion was approved 412 to 149. The vote was a key moment in the
history of the Blair administration, as the number of government MPs who rebelled
against the vote was the greatest since the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846.
- Three government ministers resigned in protest at the war, John Denham, Lord Hunt
of Kings Heath, and the then Leader of the House of Commons Robin Cook.
- In October 2002, former U.S. President Bill Clinton warned about possible dangers of
pre-emptive military action against Iraq. Speaking in the UK at a Labour
Party conference he said: "As a preemptive action today, however well-justified, may
come back with unwelcome consequences in the future.... I don't care how precise
your bombs and your weapons are when you set them off, innocent people will die."
- In the same period, Pope John Paul II of the Roman Catholic Church publicly
condemned the military intervention. During a private meeting, he also said directly to
George W. Bush: "Mr. President, you know my opinion about the war in Iraq. Let's
talk about something else. Every violence, against one or a million, is a blasphemy
addressed to the image and likeness of God."
- On 20 January 2003, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin declared "we
believe that military intervention would be the worst solution".
- Meanwhile, anti-war groups across the world organized public protests.
- There were serious legal questions surrounding the launching of the war against Iraq
and the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war in general. On 16 September 2004, Kofi
Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, said of the invasion, "I have

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from
the Charter point of view, it was illegal."
- Despite all this, Iraq was invaded with the first Central Intelligence Agency team
entering Iraq on 10 July 2002. This team was composed of members of the
CIA's Special Activities Division and was later joined by members of the
US military's elite Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). Together, they
prepared for an invasion by conventional forces. These efforts consisted of persuading
the commanders of several Iraqi military divisions to surrender rather than oppose the
invasion, and identifying all the initial leadership targets during very high risk
reconnaissance missions.
- According to General Franks, there were eight objectives of the invasion:
 First, ending the regime of Saddam Hussein.
 Second, to identify, isolate, and eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
 Third, to search for, to capture, and to drive out terrorists from that country.
 Fourth, to collect such intelligence as we can relate to terrorist networks.
 Fifth, to collect such intelligence as we can relate to the global network of
illicit weapons of mass destruction.
 Sixth, to end sanctions and to immediately deliver humanitarian support to the
displaced and to many needy Iraqi citizens.
 Seventh, to secure Iraq's oil fields and resources, which belong to the Iraqi
people.
 And last, to help the Iraqi people create conditions for a transition to
representative self-government."
- The invasion was a quick and decisive operation encountering major resistance,
though not what the U.S., British and other forces expected. The Iraqi regime had
prepared to fight both a conventional and irregular, asymmetric warfare at the same
time, conceding territory when faced with superior conventional forces, largely
armored, but launching smaller-scale attacks in the rear using fighters dressed in
civilian and paramilitary clothes.
- Etc
The aftermath
- On 9 April, Baghdad fell, ending Saddam's 24-year rule.
- U.S. forces seized the deserted Ba'ath Party ministries and, according to some reports
later disputed by the Marines on the ground, stage-managed the tearing down of a
huge iron statue of Saddam, photos and video of which became symbolic of the event,
although later controversial.
- According to the Pentagon, 250,000 short tons (230,000 t) (of 650,000 short tons
(590,000 t) total) of ordnance was looted, providing a significant source of
ammunition for the Iraqi insurgency. The invasion phase concluded when Tikrit,
Saddam's home town, fell with little resistance to the U.S. Marines of Task Force
Tripoli.
- in the invasion phase of the war (19 March – 30 April), an estimated 9,200 Iraqi
combatants were killed by coalition forces along with an estimated 3,750 non-

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 combatants, i.e. civilians who did not take up arms. Coalition forces reported the
death in combat of 139 U.S. military personnel and 33 UK military personnel.
- On 1 May 2003, President Bush visited the aircraft carrier USS Abraham
Lincoln operating a few miles west of San Diego, California. At sunset, he held his
nationally televised "Mission Accomplished" speech, delivered before the sailors
and airmen on the flight deck. Bush declared the end of major combat operations in
Iraq, due to the defeat of Iraq's conventional forces, while maintaining that much still
needed to be done.
- Nevertheless, Saddam Hussein remained at large, and significant pockets of resistance
remained. After Bush's speech, coalition forces noticed a flurry of attacks on its troops
began to gradually increase in various regions, such as the "Sunni Triangle".
- The initial Iraqi insurgents were supplied by hundreds of weapons caches created
before the invasion by the Iraqi army and Republican Guard.
- Insurgents used various guerrilla tactics, including mortars, missiles, suicide
attacks, snipers, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), car bombs, small arms fire
(usually with assault rifles), and RPGs (rocket propelled grenades), as well as
sabotage against the petroleum, water, and electrical infrastructures.
- Coalition efforts to establish post-invasion Iraq commenced after the fall of Saddam's
regime. The coalition nations, together with the United Nations, began to work to
establish a stable, compliant democratic state capable of defending itself from non-
coalition forces, as well as overcoming internal divisions.
- Meanwhile, coalition military forces launched several operations around
the Tigris River peninsula and in the Sunni Triangle. A series of similar operations
were launched throughout the summer in the Sunni Triangle. In late 2003, the
intensity and pace of insurgent attacks began to increase. A sharp surge in guerrilla
attacks ushered in an insurgent effort that was termed the "Ramadan Offensive", as it
coincided with the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
- To counter this offensive, coalition forces began to use airpower and artillery again
for the first time since the end of the invasion, by striking suspected ambush sites and
mortar launching positions. Surveillance of major routes, patrols, and raids on
suspected insurgents was stepped up. In addition, two villages, including Saddam's
birthplace of al-Auja and the small town of Abu Hishma, were surrounded by barbed
wire and carefully monitored.
- Shortly after the invasion, the multinational coalition created the Coalition Provisional
Authority (CPA; , based in the Green Zone, as a transitional government of Iraq until
the establishment of a democratic government. Citing United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1483 (22 May 2003) and the laws of war, the CPA vested itself
with executive, legislative, and judicial authority over the Iraqi government from the
period of the CPA's inception on 21 April 2003 until its dissolution on 28 June 2004.
- The CPA was originally headed by Jay Garner, a former U.S. military officer, but his
appointment lasted only until 11 May 2003, when President Bush appointed L. Paul
Bremer. On 16 May 2003, his first day on the job, Paul Bremer issued Coalition
Provisional Authority Order 1 to exclude from the new Iraqi government and
administration members of the Baathist party.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - This policy, known as De-Ba'athification, eventually led to the removal of 85,000 to
100,000 Iraqi people from their job, including 40,000 school teachers who had joined
the Baath Party simply to keep their jobs. U.S. army general Ricardo Sanchez called
the decision a "catastrophic failure".
- Bremer served until the CPA's dissolution in June 2004.
- In summer 2003, the multinational forces focused on capturing the remaining
leaders of the former government. On 22 July, a raid by the U.S. 101st Airborne
Division and soldiers from Task Force 20 killed Saddam's sons (Uday and Qusay)
along with one of his grandsons. In all, over 300 top leaders of the former government
were killed or captured, as well as numerous lesser functionaries and military
personnel.
- Most significantly, Saddam Hussein himself was captured on 13 December 2003, on a
farm near Tikrit in Operation Red Dawn.
- The operation was conducted by the United States Army's 4th Infantry Division and
members of Task Force 121. Intelligence on Saddam's whereabouts came from his
family members and former bodyguards.
- With the capture of Saddam and a drop in the number of insurgent attacks, some
concluded the multinational forces were prevailing in the fight against the insurgency.
The provisional government began training the new Iraqi security forces intended to
police the country, and the United States promised over $20 billion in reconstruction
money in the form of credit against Iraq's future oil revenues. Oil revenue was also
used for rebuilding schools and for work on the electrical and refining infrastructure.
- Shortly after the capture of Saddam, elements left out of the Coalition Provisional
Authority began to agitate for elections and the formation of an Iraqi Interim
Government. Most prominent among these was the Shia cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali
al-Sistani. The Coalition Provisional Authority opposed allowing democratic elections
at this time.[161] The insurgents stepped up their activities. The two most turbulent
centers were the area around Fallujah and the poor Shia sections of cities
from Baghdad (Sadr City) to Basra in the south.
- The start of 2004 was marked by a relative lull in violence. Insurgent forces
reorganised during this time, studying the multinational forces' tactics and planning a
renewed offensive. However, violence did increase during the Iraq Spring Fighting of
2004 with foreign fighters from around the Middle East as well as al-Qaeda in Iraq, an
affiliated al-Qaeda group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, helping to drive the
insurgency.
- As the insurgency grew there was a distinct change in targeting from the coalition
forces towards the new Iraqi Security Forces, as hundreds of Iraqi civilians and police
were killed over the next few months in a series of massive bombings.
- An organized Sunni insurgency, with deep roots and both nationalist and Islamist
motivations, was becoming more powerful throughout Iraq. The Shia Mahdi
Army also began launching attacks on coalition targets in an attempt to seize control
from Iraqi security forces. The southern and central portions of Iraq were beginning to
erupt in urban guerrilla combat as multinational forces attempted to keep control and
prepared for a counteroffensive.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - The most serious fighting of the war so far began on 31 March 2004, when Iraqi
insurgents in Fallujah ambushed a Blackwater USA convoy led by four U.S. private
military contractors who were providing security for food caterers Eurest Support
Services.
- The four armed contractors, Scott Helvenston, Jerko Zovko, Wesley Batalona, and
Michael Teague, were killed with grenades and small arms fire.
- Subsequently, their bodies were dragged from their vehicles by local people, beaten,
set ablaze, and their burned corpses hung over a bridge crossing the Euphrates.
- Photos of the event were released to news agencies worldwide, causing a great deal of
indignation and moral outrage in the United States, and prompting an unsuccessful
"pacification" of the city: the First Battle of Fallujah in April 2004.
- The offensive was resumed in November 2004 in the bloodiest battle of the war:
the Second Battle of Fallujah, described by the U.S. military as "the heaviest urban
combat (that they had been involved in) since the Battle of Hue City in Vietnam."
- During the assault, U.S. forces used white phosphorus as an incendiary weapon
against insurgent personnel, attracting controversy. The 46-day battle resulted in a
victory for the coalition, with 95 U.S. soldiers killed along with approximately 1,350
insurgents. Fallujah was totally devastated during the fighting, though civilian
casualties were low, as they had mostly fled before the battle.
- Another major event of that year was the revelation of widespread prisoner
abuse at Abu Ghraib, which received international media attention in April 2004.
- First reports of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse, as well as graphic pictures showing
U.S. military personnel taunting and abusing Iraqi prisoners, came to public attention
from a 60 Minutes II news report (28 April) and a Seymour M. Hersh article in The
New Yorker (posted online on 30 April.). Military correspondent Thomas
Ricks claimed that these revelations dealt a blow to the moral justifications for the
occupation in the eyes of many people, especially Iraqis, and was a turning point in
the war.
- 2004 also marked the beginning of Military Transition Teams in Iraq, which were
teams of U.S. military advisors assigned directly to New Iraqi Army units.
- On 31 January, Iraqis elected the Iraqi Transitional Government in order to draft a
permanent constitution. Although some violence and a widespread.
- Sunni boycott marred the event, most of the eligible Kurd and Shia populace
participated. On 4 February, Paul Wolfowitz announced that 15,000 U.S. troops
whose tours of duty had been extended in order to provide election security would be
pulled out of Iraq by the next month.[169] February to April proved to be relatively
peaceful months compared to the carnage of November and January, with insurgent
attacks averaging 30 a day from the prior average of 70.
- th Battle of Abu Ghraib on 2 April 2005 was an attack on United States forces at Abu
Ghraib prison, which consisted of heavy mortar and rocket fire, under which an
estimated 80–120 armed insurgents attacked with grenades, small arms, and two
vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED). The U.S. force's munitions ran
so low that orders to fix bayonets were given in preparation for hand-to-hand fighting.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 It was considered to be the largest coordinated assault on a U.S. base since the
Vietnam War.
- Hopes for a quick end to the insurgency and a withdrawal of U.S. troops were dashed
in May, Iraq's bloodiest month since the invasion. Suicide bombers, believed to be
mainly disheartened Iraqi Sunni Arabs, Syrians and Saudis, tore through Iraq. Their
targets were often Shia gatherings or civilian concentrations of Shias. As a result, over
700 Iraqi civilians died in that month, as well as 79 U.S. soldiers.
- The summer of 2005 saw fighting around Baghdad and at Tall Afar in northwestern
Iraq as U.S. forces tried to seal off the Syrian border. This led to fighting in the
autumn in the small towns of the Euphrates valley between the capital and that border.
- A referendum was held on 15 October in which the new Iraqi
constitution was ratified. An Iraqi National Assembly was elected in December, with
participation from the Sunnis as well as the Kurds and Shia.
- Insurgent attacks increased in 2005 with 34,131 recorded incidents, compared to a
total 26,496 for the previous year.
- On 12 March, five United States Army soldiers of the 502nd Infantry Regiment
allegedly raped the 15-year-old Iraqi girl Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, and then
murdered her, her father, her mother Fakhriya Taha Muhasen and her six-year-old
sister Hadeel Qassim Hamza al-Janabi. The soldiers then set fire to the girl's body to
conceal evidence of the crime. Four of the soldiers were convicted of rape and murder
and the fifth was convicted of lesser crimes for their involvement in the events, which
became known as the Mahmudiyah rape and killings
- On 6 June 2006, the United States was successful in tracking Abu Musab al-Zarqawi,
the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq who was killed in a targeted killing, while attending a
meeting in an isolated safehouse approximately 8 km (5.0 mi) north of Baqubah.
Having been tracked by a British UAV, radio contact was made between the
controller and two United States Air Force F-16C jets, which identified the house and
at 14:15 GMT, the lead jet dropped two 500-pound (230 kg) guided bombs, a laser-
guided GBU-12 and GPS-guided GBU-38 on the building where he was located. Six
others—three male and three female individuals—were also reported killed. Among
those killed were one of his wives and their child.
- the government of Iraq took office on 20 May 2006, following approval by
the members of the Iraqi National Assembly. This followed the general election in
December 2005. The government succeeded the Iraqi Transitional Government,
which had continued in office in a caretaker capacity until the formation of the
permanent government.
- In a 10 January 2007, televised address to the U.S. public, Bush proposed 21,500
more troops for Iraq, a job program for Iraqis, more reconstruction proposals, and
$1.2 billion for these programs. On 23 January 2007, in the 2007 State of the Union
Address, Bush announced "deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional
soldiers and Marines to Iraq".
- Pressures on U.S. troops were compounded by the continuing withdrawal of coalition
forces. In early 2007, British Prime Minister Blair announced that
following Operation Sinbad, British troops would begin to withdraw from Basra

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 Governorate, handing security over to the Iraqis. In July Danish Prime
Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen also announced the withdrawal of 441 Danish
troops from Iraq, leaving only a unit of nine soldiers manning four observational
helicopters. In October 2019, the new Danish government said it will not re-open an
official probe into the country's participation in the US-led military coalition in 2003
Iraqi war.
- By March 2008, violence in Iraq was reported curtailed by 40–80%, according to a
Pentagon report. Independent reports raised questions about those assessments. An
Iraqi military spokesman claimed that civilian deaths since the start of the troop surge
plan were 265 in Baghdad, down from 1,440 in the four previous weeks.
- The rate of U.S. combat deaths in Baghdad nearly doubled to 3.14 per day in the first
seven weeks of the "surge" in security activity, compared to previous period. Across
the rest of Iraq it decreased slightly.
- On 14 August 2007, the deadliest single attack of the whole war occurred. Nearly
800 civilians were killed by a series of coordinated suicide bomb attacks on the
northern Iraqi settlement of Kahtaniya. More than 100 homes and shops were
destroyed in the blasts. U.S. officials blamed al-Qaeda. The targeted villagers
belonged to the non-Muslim Yazidi ethnic minority. The attack may have represented
the latest in a feud that erupted earlier that year when members of the Yazidi
community stoned to death a teenage girl called Du'a Khalil Aswad accused of dating
a Sunni Arab man and converting to Islam. The killing of the girl was recorded on
camera-mobiles and the video was uploaded onto the internet.
Political developments and effects to the region
- more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation
of their country for the first time.
- In 2007, tensions increased greatly between Iran and Iraqi Kurdistan due to the latter's
giving sanctuary to the militant Kurdish secessionist group Party for a Free Life in
Kurdistan (PEJAK.)
- according to reports, Iran had been shelling PEJAK positions in Iraqi Kurdistan since
16 August. These tensions further increased with an alleged border incursion on 23
August by Iranian troops who attacked several Kurdish villages killing an unknown
number of civilians and militant
- coalition forces also began to target alleged Iranian Quds force operatives in Iraq,
either arresting or killing suspected members. The Bush administration and coalition
leaders began to publicly state that Iran was supplying weapons,
particularly EFP devices, to Iraqi insurgents and militias although they failed to
provide any proof for these allegations. Further sanctions on Iranian organizations
were also announced by the Bush administration in the autumn of 2007.
- Border incursions by PKK militants based in Northern Iraq have continued to harass
Turkish forces, with casualties on both sides. In the fall of 2007, the Turkish military
stated their right to cross the Iraqi Kurdistan border in "hot pursuit" of PKK militants
and began shelling Kurdish areas in Iraq and attacking PKK bases in the Mount
Cudi region with aircraft.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - The Turkish parliament approved a resolution permitting the military to pursue the
PKK in Iraqi Kurdistan. In November, Turkish gunships attacked parts of northern
Iraq in the first such attack by Turkish aircraft since the border tensions
escalated. Another series of attacks in mid-December hit PKK targets in the Qandil,
Zap, Avashin and Hakurk regions. The latest series of attacks involved at least 50
aircraft and artillery and Kurdish officials reported one civilian killed and two
wounded.
- Additionally, weapons that were given to Iraqi security forces by the U.S. military
were being recovered by authorities in Turkey after being used by PKK in that state.
- The war’s immediate results.
- The invasion and occupation led to sectarian violence, which caused widespread
displacement among Iraqi civilians. The Iraqi Red Crescent organization estimated
the total internal displacement was around 2.3 million in 2008, with as many as 2
million Iraqis having left the country.
- Poverty led many Iraqi women to turn to prostitution to support themselves and their
families, attracting sex ‘tourists’ from regional lands.
- The invasion led to a constitution, which supported democracy as long as laws did not
violate traditional Islamic principles, and a parliamentary election was held in 2005.
- In addition, the invasion allegedly preserved the autonomy of the Kurdish region, and
stability brought new economic prosperity. Because the Kurdish region is historically
the most democratic area of Iraq, many Iraqi refugees from other territories fled into
the Kurdish land.
- Sectarian violence continued in the first half of 2013. At least 56 people died in April
when a Sunni protest in Hawija was interrupted by a government-supported helicopter
raid and a series of violent incidents occurred in May.
- On 20 May 2013, at least 95 people died in a wave of car bomb attacks that was
preceded by a car bombing on 15 May that led to 33 deaths; also, on 18 May, 76
people were killed in the Sunni areas of Baghdad. Some experts have stated that Iraq
could return to the brutal sectarian conflict of 2006.
- On 22 July 2013, at least five hundred convicts, most of whom were senior members
of al-Qaida who had received death sentences, broke out of Iraq's Abu Ghraib jail
when comrades launched a military-style assault to free them. The attack began when
a suicide bomber drove a car packed with explosives into prison gates.
- By mid-2014 the country was in chaos with a new government yet to be formed
following national elections, and the insurgency reaching new heights. In early June
2014 the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) took over the cities of Mosul and
Tikrit and said it was ready to march on Baghdad, while Iraqi Kurdish forces took
control of key military installations in the major oil city of Kirkuk. The al-Qaida
breakaway group formally declared the creation of an Islamic state on 29 June 2014,
in the territory under its control.
- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki asked his parliament to declare a state of
emergency that would give him increased powers, but the lawmakers refused.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - On 14 August 2014, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki succumbed to pressure at home
and abroad to step down. This paved the way for Haidar al-Abadi to take over on 19
August 2014.
- In September 2014, President Obama acknowledged that the U.S. underestimated the
rise of the Islamic State and overestimated the ability of the Iraqi military to fend off
ISIL.
- As a result, he announced the return of U.S. forces to Iraq, but only in the form of
aerial support, in an effort to halt the advance of ISIL forces, render humanitarian aid
to stranded refugees and stabilize the political situation.
- A civil war between ISIL and the central government continued for the next three
years, until the government declared victory in December 2017.
- following the election of Donald Trump, the United States intensified its campaign
against the Islamic State by January 2017. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said a tactical
shift to surrounding Islamic State strongholds in Mosul, Iraq, and Raqqa, Syria, was
devised not only to "annihilate" ISIL fighters hunkered down there, but also to
prevent them from returning to their home nations in Europe, Africa, and the Middle
East. In 2017, U.S.-backed Kurdish forces captured Raqqa, which had served as the
ISIL capital.
- By 2018, violence in Iraq was at its lowest level in ten years. This was greatly a result
of the defeat of ISIL forces and the subsequent calming-down of the insurgency
- in January 2020, the Iraqi parliament voted for all foreign troops to leave the country.
This would end its standing agreement with the United States to station 5,200 soldiers
in Iraq. President Trump objected to withdrawing troops and threatened Iraq with
sanctions over this decision.
- Critique
o The Bush Administration's rationale for the Iraq War has faced heavy criticism
from an array of popular and official sources both inside and outside the
United States, with many U.S. citizens finding many parallels with
the Vietnam War.
o Both proponents and opponents of the invasion have also criticized the
prosecution of the war effort along with a number of other lines. Most
significantly, critics have assailed the United States and its allies for not
devoting enough troops to the mission, not adequately planning for post-
invasion Iraq, and for permitting and perpetrating human rights abuses.
o As the war has progressed, critics have also railed against the high human and
financial costs. In 2016, the United Kingdom published the Iraq Inquiry, a
public inquiry which was broadly critical of the actions of the British
government and military in making the case for the war, in tactics and in
planning for the aftermath of the war.
o Legality of the invasion remains a bone of contention.
o Human casualties
o Human rights violations such as the Iraq prison abuse scandals

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 o Insufficient post-invasion plans, in particular inadequate troop levels
(A RAND Corporation study stated that 500,000 troops would be required for
success.)
o Financial costs with approximately $612 billion spent as of 4/09 the CBO has
estimated the total cost of the war in Iraq to the United States will be
around $1.9 trillion.
o Adverse effect on U.S.-led global "war on terror"
o Damage to U.S.' traditional alliances and influence in the region
o Endangerment and ethnic cleansing of religious and ethnic minorities by
insurgents
o Disruption of Iraqi oil production and related energy security concerns
(The price of oil has quadrupled since 2002.)
o Etc
o Comments from other sections of the academia
- Dubbed by some as ‘Operation Iraqi Liberation Oil’ the Occupation of Iraq was one
of the most extraordinary military campaigns ever conducted by the United States.
- According to some the military victory was never in question. The complete
disproportionality between the two sides in the war was reminiscent of the old
colonial wars in Africa, where European troops armed with rifles, machine guns and
artillery mowed down defenders armed with muzzle-loading muskets and swords.
When British troops wiped out 9,000 Dervish fighters in the 1898 "battle" of
Omdurman, reports from the scene indicated that no Sudanese got within 300 yards of
British positions.
- In the war on Iraq, the U.S., with complete control of Iraqi skies, belched out
unimaginable firepower from air and land on Iraqis armed only with outmoded tanks,
automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and mortars.
- A country which boasts the world's largest, most state-of-the-art military invaded a
country already devastated by a previous war and bled dry by a 12-year blockade.
This can hardly be seen as some brilliant military feat. True to form, the U.S. picked a
weak and almost defenseless target as the backdrop to demonstrate its awesome
firepower–even insisting that Iraq disarm before the invasion began. It was a foregone
conclusion that Iraq's only possible means of defense would be to try and turn the
cities into guerrilla strongholds. It was clear that the U.S. would hold undisputed sway
not only of Iraqi airspace, but of its highways and deserts. In these circumstances, the
almost completely unopposed drive to Baghdad can hardly be described as "dazzling
- what was surprising was the scale of the resistance in the first week of the invasion.
- Before the start of the war, Bush administration officials were crowing that the Iraqi
army would collapse at the "first whiff of gunpowder, and that Iraqis would
"welcome" the U.S. as "liberators’. Indeed, the March 20 "decapitation strike" aimed
at murdering Saddam Hussein was only one of many indications that the U.S. hoped,
by lopping off the top leadership quickly, to occupy the country without much of a
fight. Instead, U.S. and British forces found themselves in fierce firefights with Iraqi
irregulars armed only with machine guns and grenade launchers. More often than not

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 they were met with sullen, even hostile, reactions from the local population–reactions
that only intensified as the U.S. bombing and killing became more indiscriminate.
- It is important to note that however much the Iraqis hated Saddam Hussein, they did
not appear to be overjoyed in the Shia Muslim south, at least, about the prospect of a
U.S. occupation."
- These sentiments only increased as the invaders' bombs cut off electricity, water and
food distribution throughout the southern cities, creating a humanitarian crisis that
persists as the ISR goes to press. The sentiments expressed by a farmer in Safwan,
another border town, were repeated over and over again to reporters throughout the
war:"How can we be happy? They are killing our people here," said farmer Majid
Simsim, pointing to a mosque in the center of town where an ambulance had just
brought the bodies of two other farmers killed by U.S. aircraft in the fields nearby.
"We want our country to be independent again and the Americans to leave."
- Cities that were meant to fall immediately took days to conquer. Umm Qasr, a city of
40,000 just over the Kuwaiti border, took more than five days to capture. Iraqi forces
put up the fiercest fight in the city of Nasiriyah, where U.S. marines battled for more
than two weeks to seize control of it. Most of the city's several hundred defenders
were members of the guerrilla units, the "Saddam Fedayeen," who buried weapons
throughout the city so as to stage fierce fights, retreat to another place and fight again.
In a single day of fighting, Iraqis killed two dozen Marines. "The Marines are
aggrieved," wrote one reporter, "aggrieved that the Iraqis aren't more grateful,
aggrieved that the Iraqis are shooting at them."
- The air bombardment of Iraq began simultaneously with the ground invasion. On
April 5, it is reported that "coalition" forces had "launched 725 Tomahawk cruise
missiles, flown 18,000 sorties, dropped 50 cluster bombs and discharged 12,000
precision-guided munitions.
- The U.S. concentrated heavy bombardment on Republican Guard positions south of
Baghdad, killing and maiming untold numbers of young men.
- There is a certain logic that has been unleashed by the U.S. conquest of Iraq. The
world has now been warned–if you are not "with us," you will pay for it in blood. The
victory in Iraq strengthened all the hawkish tendencies in the Bush government,
giving new lift to the neoconservative agenda to use Iraq as a launching pad to
reshape the entire Middle East region.
- Already, the U.S. threatened to go after Syria if it refused to withdraw support from
Hezbollah in Lebanon, first by cutting off the flow of Iraqi oil to Syria, and by hinting
at possible military action. Iran, which has long been in the warhawks' sights–was
warned not to "meddle" in Iraqi affairs–as if the U.S. was not now the biggest
"meddler" in the Middle East.
- And Washington's plans do not end with redrawing the map of the Middle East. Asia
and Europe are also in their sights. But China, Russia and the EU are not Saddam
Hussein's Iraq.
- Each time the U.S. strikes down a challenger to its rule, the U.S. is going to have to
rely more and more on coercion in order to preserve its new world order. This state of

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 affairs will weaken U.S. persuasion around the world and increase the growing
resentment held toward the United States.
- It will further encourage potential superpowers such as China to increase its power as
to be able to rival the United States. When this happens, as it did in World War II
between the U.S. and Japan, the world could very well witness another clash between
the powers and interests of titans along with all the negative implications that holds.
- In the past, colonial powers such as France and Britain covered their rapacious
designs in the language of "civilizing missions" or "white man's burden." Today, that
language has been replaced by "democratization."
- For democracy, read not just imposing friendly regimes, but opening up prostrate
economies to the domination of American capital and their markets to American
products–including cultural products. When a president who barely squeaked into
power amid well-founded reports of vote tampering, whose administration acts as a
policy board for its crony capitalist friends, talks of bringing democracy abroad, it is
right to be skeptical.
- Some in the antiwar camp have argued not that the U.S. should leave, but that the
occupation should be taken over by the UN.
- We should be clear that the UN's role in the conflict has been either to acquiesce to
American plans, or, more recently, to act as a weak lever for European powers France
and Germany to exercise some pressure on the U.S.
- They have done this not out of concern for the Iraqi people, but out of concern for
their own economic and strategic interests. The UN is seen by these powers as a lever
to get in on the Iraqi spoils. That is what is behind resistance in the Security Council
to lifting the sanctions, for example.
- Etc
- Study Question: Analyse the objectives given for the invasion of Iraq, the approach
used and the consequences then conclude whether the invasion was justified or not.
 Saudi Arabia: Political Opposition and Reform
- The politics of Saudi Arabia takes place in the context of a totalitarian absolute
monarchy with Islamist lines, where the King is both the head of
state and government.
- Decisions are, to a large extent, made on the basis of consultation among the senior
princes of the royal family and the religious establishment.
- The Qur'an is declared to be the constitution of the country, which is governed on the
basis of Islamic law (Shari'a).
- The Allegiance Council is responsible to determine the new King and the new Crown
Prince. All citizens of full age have a right to attend, meet, and petition the king
directly through the traditional tribal meeting known as the majlis.
- The government is dominated by the vast royal family, the Al Saud, which has often
been divided by internal disputes and into factions. The members of the family are the
principal political actors allowed by the government.
- political participation outside the royal family is limited. Saudi Arabia is one of only
two countries (the other being Vatican City) that does not have a separate legislative
body.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy, although, according to the Basic Law of Saudi
Arabia adopted by royal decree in 1992, the king must comply with Sharia (that is,
Islamic law) and the Qur'an.
- The Qur'an and the Sunnah are declared to be the country's constitution. There is no
legally binding written constitution and the Qur'an and the Sunna remain subject to
interpretation. This is carried out by the ulama, the Saudi religious establishment.
- The Basic Law specifies that the king must be chosen from among the sons of the first
king, Abdul Aziz Al Saud, and their male descendants subject to the subsequent
approval of leaders (the ulama).
- In 2007, an "Allegiance Council" was created, comprising King Abdulaziz's surviving
sons plus a son of each of his deceased sons, to determine who will be the heir
apparent (the Crown Prince) after the previous heir apparent dies or accedes to the
throne.
- Prince Mohammad bin Salman is the current Crown Prince, and is widely regarded as
the country's de facto ruler.
- The king combines legislative, executive, and judicial functions and royal decrees
form the basis of the country's legislation. The king is also the prime minister and
presides over the Council of Ministers (Majlis al-Wuzarāʾ), which comprises the first
and second deputy prime ministers (usually the first and second in line to the throne
respectively), 23 ministers with portfolio, and five ministers of state.
- The king makes appointments to and dismissals from the Council, which is
responsible for such executive and administrative matters as foreign and domestic
policy, defense, finance, health, and education, administered through numerous
separate agencies.
- There is also a 150-member Consultative Assembly, appointed by the King, which
can propose legislation to the King but has no legislative powers itself, including no
role in budget formation. The government budget itself is not fully disclosed to the
public. "Fully 40%" ... is labeled 'Other sectors' (including defense, security,
intelligence, direct investment of the kingdom's revenues outside the country, and
how much goes directly to the royal family).
- Although in theory, the country is an absolute monarchy, in practice major policy
decisions are made outside these formal governmental structures and not solely by the
king.
- Decisions are made by establishing a consensus within the royal family (comprising
the numerous descendants of the kingdom's founder, King Abdulaziz). Also, the
views of important members of Saudi society, including the ulama (religious
scholars), leading tribal sheiks, and heads of prominent commercial families are
considered.
- As an absolute monarchy, the personality and capabilities of the reigning monarch
influence the politics and national policies of the country. King Saud (1953–1964)
was considered incompetent and extravagant and his reign led to an economic and
political crisis that resulted in his forced abdication.
- King Faisal (1964–1975) was a "modernist" who favored economic, technological
and governmental progress but was also politically and religiously conservative. He

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 directed the country's rapid economic and bureaucratic development of the early
1970s, but also made concessions to the religious establishment, and abandoned plans
to broaden political participation.
- King Khalid (1975–1982) left government largely to his Crown Prince, Fahd, who
succeeded him as King (1982–2005). Prince Fahd was a talented administrator who
initiated significant industrial developments in the Kingdom. He was regarded by
many as the "father of the country's modernization". However, during the last 10
years of his reign, ill-health prevented him from fully functioning. In the absence of a
king who could provide strong central leadership, the state structure began to
fragment and the country stagnated.
- King Abdullah, who came to the throne in 2005, was seen as a reformer and has
introduced economic reforms (limited deregulation, encouragement of foreign
investment, and privatization) and made modernizing changes to the judiciary and
government ministries.
- It is alleged that corruption is widespread in Saudi Arabia, most prevalent in the form
of nepotism, the use of middlemen, ‘wasta’, to do business as well as patronage
systems. The Saudi government and the royal family have often, and over many years,
been accused of corruption. In a country that is said to "belong" to the royal family
and is named after it, the lines between state assets and the personal wealth of senior
princes are blurred. The corruption has been described as systemic and endemic,[and
its existence was acknowledged] and defended by Prince Bandar bin Sultan (a senior
member of the royal family) in an interview in 2001
Reforms
- Since the 9/11 attacks in 2001, there has been mounting pressure to reform and
modernize the royal family's rule, an agenda championed by King Abdullah both
before and after his accession in 2005.
- The creation of the Consultative Council in the early 1990s did not satisfy demands
for political participation, and, in 2003, an annual National Dialogue Forum was
announced that would allow selected professionals and intellectuals to publicly debate
current national issues, within certain prescribed parameters.
- In 2005, the first municipal elections were held. In 2007, the Allegiance Council was
created to regulate the succession. In 2009, the king made significant personnel
changes to the government by appointing reformers to key positions and the first
woman to a ministerial post. However, the changes have been criticized as being too
slow or merely cosmetic, and the royal family is reportedly divided on the speed and
direction of reform.
- In 2011, Abdullah announced that women will be able to be nominated to the Shura
Council
Politics outside the Saudi royal family.
- Politics in Saudi Arabia, outside the royal family, can be examined in three contexts:
the extent to which the royal family allows political participation by the wider Saudi
society, opposition to the regime, and Islamist terrorism.
- Outside the House of Al Saud, participation in the political process is limited to a
relatively small segment of the population and takes the form of the royal family

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 consulting with the ulama, tribal sheiks and members of important commercial
families on major decisions.
- This process is not reported by the Saudi media. In theory, all males of the age of
majority have a right to petition the king directly through the traditional tribal meeting
known as the majlis.
- In many ways, the approach to government differs little from the traditional system of
tribal rule. Tribal identity remains strong and, outside the royal family, political
influence is frequently determined by tribal affiliation, with tribal sheiks maintaining
a considerable degree of influence over local and national events. In recent years there
have been limited steps to widen political participation, such as the establishment of
the Consultative Council in the early 1990s and the National Dialogue Forum in 2003.
- The rule of the Al Saud faces political opposition from four
sources: Sunni Islamist activism, liberal critics, including an underground green party,
the Shia minority – particularly in the Eastern Province; and long-standing tribal and
regional particularistic opponents (for example in the Hejaz). Of these, the Islamic
activists have been the most prominent threat to the regime and have in recent years
perpetrated a number of violent or terrorist acts in the country. However, open protest
against the government, even if peaceful, is not tolerated. On 29 January 2011,
hundreds of protesters gathered in the city of Jeddah in a rare display of protest
against the city's poor infrastructure after deadly floods swept through the city, killing
eleven people. Police stopped the demonstration after about 15 minutes and arrested
30 to 50 people.
- In March 2018, the crown prince Mohammed bin Salman faced severe criticism from
British opposition figures during his visit to the United Kingdom. Salman was
accused of funding extremism in the UK, committing human rights abuses
domestically, and breaching international humanitarian law in Yemen , where
millions are on the verge of famine.
- Osama bin Laden and 15 out of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals or used to
be Saudi nationals and former CIA director James Woolsey described Saudi
Arabian Wahhabism as "the soil in which Al-Qaeda and its sister terrorist
organizations are flourishing."
- Since 2011, Saudi Arabia has been affected by its own Arab Spring protests.(we will
be covereing this in more details in forthcoming sections of this modue) In response,
King Abdullah announced on 22 February 2011 a series of benefits for citizens
amounting to $36 billion, of which $10.7 billion was earmarked for housing.
- No political reforms were announced as part of the package, though some prisoners
indicted for financial crimes were pardoned.
- On 18 March the same year, King Abdullah announced a package of $93 billion,
which included 500,000 new homes to a cost of $67 billion, in addition to creating
60,000 new security jobs.
- As mentioned earlier, Saudi Arabia’s new crown prince, the 31-year-old Mohammed
bin Salman, presents himself as a modernizer. His supporters see him as bringing
Saudi Arabia up to date with the needs and aspirations of its population, who are

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 accustomed to being ruled by men in their 80s but are mostly under 30 themselves.
His critics see him as inexperienced and reckless.
- Whatever view is taken, MBS, as he is nicknamed, is disrupting the traditional model
of Saudi government on a number of fronts at once. Foreign policy has changed
dramatically, from the war in Yemen—the first war Saudi Arabia has led since the
state was formed—to joining forces with the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt to boycott
Qatar.
- Moreover, his sudden elevation to crown prince in broke with tradition in a dynasty
where power has long been shared between elderly half-brothers—the throne has only
once before passed from father to son.
- But while MBS is changing Saudi Arabia in many ways, one change is conspicuous
by its absence: political reform. Nonetheless, this can’t be neglected forever, as all the
other changes are altering the social contract that the kingdom has established over
decades.
- etc
Study Question. With the aid of the Saudi Arabia case state and others, debate in favour
or against the existence of opposition politics in the Middle East region.

 Lebanon: Sectarianism and Confessional System

- Lebanon is a parliamentary democratic republic within the overall framework

of confessionalism, a form of consociationalism in which the highest offices are
proportionately reserved for representatives from certain religious communities
leading to sectarianism.
- The constitution of Lebanon grants the people the right to change their government.
However, from the mid-1970s until the parliamentary elections in 1992, the Lebanese
Civil War (1975–1990) precluded the exercise of political rights.
- According to the constitution, direct elections must be held for the parliament every 4
years but after the parliamentary election in 2009 another election was not held
until 2018. The Parliament, in turn, elects a President every 6 years to a single term.
The President is not eligible for re-election. The last presidential election was in 2016.
The president and parliament choose the Prime Minister. Political parties may be
formed; most are based on sectarian interests.
- 2008 saw a new twist to Lebanese politics when the Doha Agreement set a new trend
where the opposition is allowed a veto power in the Lebanese Council of Ministers
and confirmed religious Confessionalism in the distribution of political power.
- since the emergence of the post-1943 state and after the destruction of the
Ottoman Caliphate, national policy has been determined largely by a relatively
restricted group of traditional regional and sectarian leaders. The 1943 National Pact,
an unwritten agreement that established the political foundations of modern Lebanon,
allocated political power on an essentially confessional system based on the 1932
census.
- Seats in parliament were divided on a 6-to-5 ratio of Christians to Muslims, until 1990
when the ratio changed to half and half. Positions in the government bureaucracy are

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 allocated on a similar basis. The pact also by custom allocated public offices along
religious lines, with the top three positions in the ruling "troika" distributed as
follows: the President, a Maronite Christian; the Speaker of the Parliament, a Shi'a
Muslim; and the Prime Minister, a Sunni Muslim.
- Efforts to alter or abolish the confessional system of allocating power have been at the
centre of Lebanese politics for decades. Those religious groups most favoured by the
1943 formula sought to preserve it, while those who saw themselves at a disadvantage
sought either to revise it after updating key demographic data or to abolish it entirely.
- Nonetheless, many of the provisions of the national pact were codified in the
1989 Taif Agreement, perpetuating sectarianism as a key element of Lebanese
political life.
- Although moderated somewhat under Ta'if, the Constitution gives the President a
strong and influential position. The President has the authority to promulgate laws
passed by the Parliament, form the government to issue supplementary regulations to
ensure the execution of laws, and to negotiate and ratify treaties.
- The Parliament is elected by adult suffrage (majority age for election is 21) based on a
system of majority or "winner-take-all" for the various confessional groups.
- There has been a recent effort to switch to proportional representation which many
argue will provide a more accurate assessment of the size of political groups and
allow minorities to be heard. Most deputies do not represent political parties as they
are known in the West, and rarely form Western-style groups in the assembly.
Political blocs are usually based on confessional and local interests or on
personal/family allegiance rather than on political affinities.
- The parliament traditionally has played a significant role in financial affairs, since it
has the responsibility for levying taxes and passing the budget. It also exercises
political control over the cabinet through formal questioning of ministers on policy
issues and by requesting a confidence debate.
- Lebanon's judicial system is based on the Napoleonic Code. Juries are not used in
trials. The Lebanese court system has three levels—courts of first instance, courts of
appeal, and the court of cassation. There also is a system of religious courts having
jurisdiction over personal status matters within their own communities, e.g., rules on
such matters as marriage, divorce, and inheritance.
- Lebanese political institutions often play a secondary role to highly confessionalized
personality-based politics. Powerful families also still play an independent role in
mobilizing votes for both local and parliamentary elections. Nonetheless, a lively
panoply of domestic political parties, some even predating independence, exists.
- The largest are all confessional based. The Free Patriotic Movement, The Kataeb
Party, also known as the Phalange Party, the National Bloc, National Liberal
Party, Lebanese Forces and the Guardians of the Cedars (now outlawed) each have
their own base among Christians. Amal and Hezbollah are the main rivals for the
organized Shi'a vote, and the PSP (Progressive Socialist Party) is the
leading Druze party. While Shi'a and Druze parties command fierce loyalty to their
leaderships, there is more factional infighting among many of the Christian parties.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 - Sunni parties have not been the standard vehicle for launching political candidates,
and tend to focus across Lebanon's borders on issues that are important to the
community at large. Lebanon's Sunni parties include Hizb ut-Tahrir, Future
Movement, Independent Nasserist Organization (INO), the Al-Tawhid, and Ahbash.
Besides the traditional confessional parties above, new secular parties have emerged
amongst which Sabaa and the Party of Lebanon representing a new trend in Lebanese
politics towards secularism and a truly democratic society.
- In addition to domestic parties, there are branches of pan-Arab secular parties
(Ba'ath parties, socialist and communist parties) that were active in the 1960s and
throughout the period of civil war.
- NB: Confessionalism is a system of government that is a de jure mix of religion and
politics. It typically entails distributing political and institutional power proportionally
among confessional communities.
- There are differences both between and among Muslim and Christian parties
regarding the role of religion in state affairs. There is a very high degree of political
activism among religious leaders across the sectarian spectrum. The interplay for
position and power among the religious, political, and party leaders and groups
produces a political tapestry of extraordinary complexity.
- In the past, the system worked to produce a viable democracy. Events over the last
decade and long-term demographic trends, however, have upset the delicate Muslim-
Christian-Druze balance and resulted in greater segregation across the social
spectrum.
- Whether in political parties, places of residence, schools, media outlets, even
workplaces, there is a lack of regular interaction across sectarian lines to facilitate the
exchange of views and promote understanding. All factions have called for a reform
of the political system.
- Some Christians favor political and administrative decentralization of the government,
with separate Muslim and Christian sectors operating within the framework of a
confederation. Muslims, for the most part, prefer a unified, central government with
an enhanced share of power commensurate with their larger share of the population.
The reforms of the Ta'if agreement moved in this direction but have not been fully
realized.
- Palestinian refugees, predominantly Sunni Muslims, whose numbers are estimated at
between 160,000–225,000, are not active on the domestic political scene.
- The President is elected by the Parliament for a six-year term and cannot be reelected
again until six years have passed from the end of the first term. The Prime
Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are appointed by the President in consultation
with the Parliament; the president is required to be a Maronite, the prime minister
a Sunni, and the Speaker of the Parliament a Shi'a.
- Lebanon operates under a strong semi-presidential system. This system is unique in
that it grants the president wide unilateral discretion, does not make him accountable
to Parliament (unless for treason), yet is elected by the Parliament.
- The President has the sole power to appoint the Prime Minister, and may dismiss
them at any point (without input from the Chamber of Deputies, which can also force

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 the President to resign). In addition, the President has the sole authority to form a
government (which must then receive a vote-of-confidence from Parliament) and
dismiss it when they wish.
- This thus makes Lebanon a president-parliamentary system rather than a premier-
presidential system (such as France), as the President does not have to cohabitate with
a Prime Minister he dislikes. The historical reason for the broad powers of the
President are that their powers were merged with those of the French High
Commissioner of Greater Lebanon, thus creating an exceptionally powerful
presidency for semi-presidential systems.
- Lebanon's national legislature is called the Assembly of Representatives. Since the
elections of 1992 (the first since the reforms of the Taif Agreement of 1989 removed
the built-in majority previously enjoyed by Christians and distributed the seats equally
between Christians and Muslims), the Parliament has had 128 seats. The term was
four years, but has recently been extended to five.
- Seats in the Parliament are confessionally distributed but elected by universal
suffrage. Each religious community has an allotted number of seats in the Parliament.
They do not represent only their co-religionists, however; all candidates in a particular
constituency, regardless of religious affiliation, must receive a plurality of the total
vote, which includes followers of all confessions. The system was designed to
minimize inter-sectarian competition and maximize cross-confessional cooperation:
candidates are opposed only by co-religionists, but must seek support from outside of
their own faith in order to be elected.

- Lebanon is extremely diverse religiously, culturally and politically. This diversity has
complicated the development of a stable political arrangement, and impeded the
development of a single national identity.
- As for diversity, there are six different Muslim sects (in numeric order: Shi'a, Sunni,
Druze, Isma'ili, Alawite or Nusayri), and twelve different Christian sects (in numeric
order: Maronite Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Melkite Catholic, Armenian Orthodox,
Syrian Catholic, Armenian Catholic, Syrian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Chaldean,
Assyrian, Copt, Protestant.)
- These sects are largely geographically defined. This mosaic of peoples and politics
has led the Lebanese to historically seek a balance of power through a political
arrangement known as confessionalism.
- Confessionalism is a type of consociationalism.
- Political scientists describe a consociational state as a state which functions durably
despite major internal divisions along ethnic, religious, or linguistic lines in which no
sub-group commands a majority.
- Common examples of consociational states include Belgium, Switzerland, India,
Spain, Lebanon and the Netherlands.
- Confessionalism, as indicated earlier on, is a system of consociational government
which distributes political and institutional power proportionally among religious sub-
communities. Lebanon is a confessional state where, for example, positions in

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 cabinet, parliament, the civil service and other institutions are apportioned according
to the relative religious populations.

How does Confessionalism contribute to Lebanon’s instability?

- The intent of the confessional system in Lebanon is that, in theory, it enables the
peaceful co-existence of Lebanon’s religious and ethnic communities by allotting
power to each according to its demographic weight.
- Nevertheless, Lebanon’s delicate confessional balance within a society of minorities
makes it extremely sensitive to internal changes and external forces. Minor changes in
the political, diplomatic or demographic environment in Lebanon can trigger mass
uncertainty and instability. Examples include:
o Demographic Change. The influx of Palestinian refugees into Lebanon in the
early 1970s was initially welcomed by Lebanon’s Sunni community, as they
viewed the Palestinians – largely Sunni – as a boost to their demographic
weight. Other groups were threatened by this influx.
o Political and Demographic Manipulation. In the 1950s, Lebanon’s Maronite
President Camille Chamoun accorded Palestinian Christians the right to apply
for Lebanese citizenship, thus seeking to boost the number of Lebanese
Christians. A similar event took place in 1994, with a naturalization decree
which increased Lebanon’s population by 10 percent, mostly Muslim.
o Foreign Intervention. Israel sought to tip the scales of power in Lebanon in
1982, when it established an agreement with Lebanese Maronite leaders to
install them in power in parallel with its invasion of Lebanon. Syria, Iran, the
US and other foreign interests have also interfered.
o Military Balance. Following the Taif Accord, for various reasons, Hezbollah
was the one militia which did not disarm as stipulated in the Accord.
Naturally, this was a catalyst for instability.

How has Confessionalism inhibited Lebanon’s political evolution?

- The Taif Accord articulated what most Lebanese will admit, “Abolishing political
sectarianism is a fundamental national objective.”
- While unable to abolish confessionalism in 1989, the Taif Accord proposed reforms
to diminish sectarianism: suggesting that posts in the civil service be merit-based;
instituting educational changes to promote national unity; removing sectarian labels
from identity cards; etc. Underlying this new direction was an understanding of some
of the drawbacks of the confessional arrangement:
o The institutionalization and deepening of sectarian differences. Confessional
emphases tended to encourage greater allegiance to one’s ethnic group, instead
of the state.
o Confessional emphases create dependencies within one’s ethnic group, e.g.
religious institutions exercise direct control over many facets of daily life (e.g.
marriage, divorce, inheritance.)

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes

 o Indirect control also abounds, as preferred jobs, housing and education are
often obtained through appeals to confessional political representatives. Such
institutions undermine the value of one’s national citizenship.
o An undermining of horizontal developmental forces. A modern, secular state
depends on the development of common, cross-cutting interests, e.g. economic
cooperation and social and cultural development. The Lebanese confessional
system creates an opposing incentive for community leaders to consolidate the
“vertical” integration of their communities.
o Demographic and social need is unaccomodated in political representation.
There has not been an official census in Lebanon since 1932 as it represents a
threat to the status quo. Nevertheless, readjustments in the political and social
balance are essential in order to reflect the cumulative effects of emigration,
birth rates, social need and social disparities. In a confessional system without
such readjustments, social discontent between confessions will inevitably
explode.
Study question: Evaluate the consociational system of politics as reflected in the
Lebanese confessionalism.

Zimano Files for Academic Purposes