Is there any responsibility for the consequences of a military intervention, even if it was committed with the best of motives but with negligent planning??
The killing in iraq is not stopping, but rather increasing. Coalition forces, withdrawn to the fortress of the green zone, are apparently powerless or unwilling to intervene in the now full-blown civil war between shiites and sunnis, which is raging mainly in baghdad and also includes parts of the iraqi police and armed forces. 100 iraqis were killed per day in june. And it is possible that the kurdish north, still largely untouched by violence, could become a new field of conflict if turkey were to carry out its threat to invade northern iraq in self-defense in order to fight the pkk. The turkish government said it was losing patience and called on the united states and iraq to take immediate action against the pkk.
Every day, death awaits the people of iraq
The un human rights report on iraq paints a bleak picture of the country "liberated" from dictator hussein by the bush administration. Criminals, insurgents, militias, religious extremists and terrorists, as well as armed neighborhood protection groups, operate – sometimes under cover or in cooperation with state security forces in rough parts of the country that is increasingly mired in a bloody civil war. In may and june alone, the iraqi ministry of health and the baghdad morgue reported 5.818 civilians killed and 5.762 civilians wounded. From january to the end of june, at least 14.338 people, including women and children, have been killed. The real numbers of those killed or injured by murder, combat, assault or torture were allowed to be even higher. The number of dead and injured has risen steadily since may 2005.
Fear, threats and ethnic cleansing are causing people to flee within the country; more and more people are leaving iraq, especially the intellectual elite. Organized crime and corruption, both overlapping with resistance groups, militias, death squads, and state structures, flourish (paramilitaries, phantom police, death squads, and citizen militias). One consequence of the bloody chaos is that reconstruction is not progressing and education and medical care remain inadequate. Human rights violations remain mostly unpunished, the power of the state and thus the validity of the law are extremely limited. The state dissolves into a patchwork of groups fighting each other and competing for influence, acting with brutality. Apparently also, according to the report, since 2005 homosexuals are increasingly the victim of assassination attempts.
The un report suggests, without sounding particularly realistic at the moment, that the policy of national reconciliation be continued and that a binding legal system be introduced, along with a strict ban on torture and the right to a fair trial. However, as the report notes, the security forces are often the very opposite of guarantors of the rule of law due to violence, corruption, completely inadequate resources and lack of internal controls. The disarmament of militias and armed groups is urgent, but presumably the erosion of the state, similar to that in afghanistan, is already too far advanced for this to be accomplished quickly. With unemployment still high, people must come to terms or join the dominant groups in order to survive. U.S. Troops and iraqi security forces had begun a roughly announced operation, "together toward progress," in june to bring violence in baghdad under control with massive operations. Nothing has changed as a result. Day after day, the murders, racketeering, attacks and kidnappings continue. Some parts of the country drown in violence. Those who are unable or unwilling to defend themselves, who do not take up arms themselves, suffer as a result.
The fact that the statistics do not include the kurdish provinces points to their special status and the difficult situation of maintaining national and territorial integrity. Voices are growing to break up iraq and create autonomous kurdish, shiite and sunni states respectively, but this may not end the conflicts for the foreseeable future, if only because of the remaining ethnic tensions and the battles over the olvorrate, for example. The creation of a kurdish state would also further aggravate tensions with neighboring countries from syria to turkey to iran, where kurdish minorities also live. Should syria and iran be involved in the war israel is waging against hezbollah and lebanon, the whole region will be in flames.
U.S. Soldier with an iraqi translator on 6. July during an early morning raid in mol. Photo: pentagon
There are two culprits for this development: the american and british governments. Even aming the best and idealistic motives for the military invasion and overthrow of the hussein regime, carried out against many warnings and with massive prere on friendly states and the international community, the two governments, and of course bush and blair in particular, had to face questions about their responsibility for the daily bloodshed. The warnings of a country falling apart and sinking into civil war, which had already persuaded bush i not to overthrow the regime of saddam hussein, but to rely on protection zones and boycotts in order to demand a political change, were thrown to the wind. However, the people held hostage by the hussein regime suffered not only from the violence, but also from inadequate supplies, a struggling economy and an already damaged infrastructure.
The hussein regime can by no means be regarded as the lesser evil compared to the current state of affairs, but even well-intentioned interventions that promise freedom, democracy, security and economic growth instead of dictatorship, if they want to change a society by force, must at least have a reasonably realistic plan to avoid the worst expected risks and to be able to implement the intended goals in a reasonably realistic way. But the american-british plan of attack, which promised a quick and cheap solution to an old geopolitical problem, did not even begin to do that, and the attempts to build new state structures after the fall made the situation worse, exacerbated by snootiness, false partnerships, corruption and ill-considered military action, not to mention the torture in abu ghraib. The naivete – or gross negligence – with which the superpower thought it could build up a functioning state militarily, or rather allow it to come into being, in a single sweep of its hand, is staggering. After all, he was supposed to lead the entire region to change according to this sparkling u.S. Pattern.
It is not only in iraq and in the middle east, where the bush administration just as simply always bets on the israeli card and did not and does not really strive for a peace solution, that the situation has now become muddled. In fact, the american and british governments, as the main culprits of the shambles that is costing people their lives every day and making them live in fear and insecurity, had to increase their aid to the country in order to bring it as quickly as possible out of the chaos into which it was brought because they were supposed to have acted on their behalf. In terms of domestic policy, however, the prere is on. In the meantime, a number of other sources of conflict have erupted or come to a head, so that the focus is now on getting out of the mess as quickly as possible without losing face. Even if troops remain stationed for years, as planned, military presence alone, primarily in green zones, will not change much in the future. The united nations is powerless, at best trying to mobilize the international community to fix the mess that has been made. In addition, all other countries are paying the price for the instability exacerbated by the global war on terrorism (gwot) and are on board for this reason as well, so that things do not get worse than they already are.
Iraq (am wendepunkt) and, of course, afghanistan (nation building in trummern) should be a warning for the u.S., nato and the eu to intervene militarily in conflicts in the hindu kush, the middle east, the congo or elsewhere, unless concrete, well thought-out, long-term and, to some extent, realistic concepts of the much-vaunted nation building are available. At least in iraq and afghanistan, nation building has failed, leaving behind failed states in which the state order has largely disintegrated. The german government, too, sees little evidence of how the missions in afghanistan and the congo, apart from their simple military presence, were actually successful in establishing stable democratic and constitutional orders. Presumably, however, the era of "humanitarian wars", which began after the end of the cold war, for example in bosnia or kosovo (human bellicism or the new moral strategy of humane war), will soon have come to an end. Behind this, it is again simply a matter of geopolitical, strategic security or economic interests, no longer a matter of democracy or overthrowing tyrants. Then mass sacrificed civilians and the suffering of people as a result of interventions and wars were no longer a reproach, but a consequence of the allegedly necessary (preventive) self-defense and power politics.
But at least democratic states will not be able to drop the "altruistic" or "moral" justification, at least as a mask. This makes them susceptible to domestic and foreign criticism of their credibility and thus capable of improvement – even if, in terms of domestic policy, politicians are just as unaccountable for the measures they implement and the political class is therefore immunized in this respect. However, it is not an anonymous, amorphous mass that is responsible for political decisions, but concrete, in principle also accountable persons. Morality, however, has always had a bad hand on the world stage, even if bush, of all people, presents himself as a facilitator of world history, which is why both philosophers of history and economic theorists tend to put their faith in the invisible hand that will ultimately guide everything to the good.