Iraq.

Capital: Baghdad

Leader: Saddam Hussein 

Population: 23,330,000

Ethnic Groups: Arab (75%), Kurd (20%)

BACKGROUND

Iraq is an artificial country. It never existed as a nation within its current borders until after World War I (1914-18). Britain looked after its affairs until 1932, when it was granted independence. However, the country was still dominated by the British who had installed a monarch, King Faisal I, to rule on their behalf.

However, the Arab people of Iraq wanted more say in running the affairs of the country. They wanted to be free of outside domination and to use the enormous wealth coming from their oil reserves for their own benefit. The monarchy survived until 1958, when a group of army officers staged a coup, killed most of the royal family, and set up a military government.

The ordinary people of the country weren't much better off under the army than they were under a king. There was a great deal of political instability as several governments were toppled by force. In 1979, Saddam Hussein rose to the top and became President of Iraq. His extreme viciousness has been well documented as has his campaign to acquire weapons of mass destruction. He used Iraq's oil wealth to build up his military capabilities.

In his early days in power, Saddam fostered closer relations with the Soviet Union, and the two nations signed a treaty of alliance in 1972. Consistently anti-Israel, Iraq took part in the 1973 Arab-Israeli War. In 1981, Israeli warplanes destroyed a nuclear reactor in Iraq that it feared would be used to produce atomic weapons.

In September 1980, Saddam launched a surprise attack on Iran. The Islamic revolution had just ousted Iran's monarch and Saddam Hussein seems to have feared that the extremist ideology might cross the border and cause him trouble. There was also a long-standing territorial dispute over control of access to the Persian Gulf that the Iraqi dictator thought he could settle through war.

Iraq initially made substantial military gains, but by mid-1982 Iranian forces had turned the tide and crossed into Iraq. The Iran-Iraq War then dragged on into eight years of knock-'em-down-drag-'em-out brutality. Casualties were heavy and chemical weapons were reportedly used by both sides. Civilian and industrial centres were bombed, and the oil flow from the Persian Gulf was disrupted. In August 1988, both sides, completely exhausted by the fighting, were ready to accept a UN-mediated ceasefire.

But, Saddam was not through with violence. In August 1990, he ordered his forces to invade Kuwait. This was again over a longstanding territorial claim. A few days before the invasion, Saddam Hussein had a meeting with the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie. During the interview, Ms. Glaspie told the Iraqi president that the United States neither approved nor disapproved of the Kuwait adventure. So, it came as quite a surprise when U.S. President George Bush (the current president's father) said the Iraqi invasion "Will not stand."

The United States organized a coalition of forces, including Canada, under the authority of the United Nations.

Using Persian Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar as staging points, the coalition began a bombing campaign against Iraqi targets. After more than a month of bombings a ground attack was launched. The whole thing was over by the end of February 1991. Iraq had suffered about 100,000 military casualties, Kuwait was liberated, and large zones covering northern and southern Iraq were declared out-of-bounds to Iraqi planes. These "no-fly zones" have been patrolled by British and American war planes ever since.

Iraq accepted the coalition peace terms. These included a promise by Iraq to scrap its chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and long-range missile programs and allowing UN inspection of weapons sites. This disarmament was to be completed by July 1991.

To force Iraqi compliance the United Nations placed economic sanctions on the country. No country was permitted to trade with Iraq except under strict supervision. The sanctions have been controversial because their main burden has fallen on the Iraqi people. Food is in short supply and medicine almost nonexistent. The United Nations has estimated the sanctions have cost the lives of as many as 500,000 children.

To ease the impact of the sanctions, Iraq was given permission in 1996 to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian supplies. The overall UN economic sanctions remained in place.

Iraq grudgingly went along with the inspections. However, Saddam Hussein never fully complied with the UN resolutions and then kicked the inspectors out in November 1998.

A month later, the United States and Britain launched air and missile attacks on some 100 military and political targets in Iraq. The attacks were criticized by China, Russia, India, France, and many Arab nations. In their aftermath, Iraq announced that it would consider allowing the arms inspectors to return only if the UN sanctions were lifted.

While the bombing continued, attempts were made through the United Nations to find a diplomatic solution to Iraq's refusal to cooperate. At the Security Council in the UN, many resolutions were passed calling on Iraq to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Saddam Hussein ignored them all.

Throughout the military and diplomatic attempts to get Iraq to comply with UN demands to destroy WMDs, it is the United States that had been pushing the process along.

U.S. President George W. Bush has tried to link the regime of Saddam Hussein with the terrorists who attacked America on 11 September 2001. Mr. Bush has targetted Saddam for removal and brought the issue to the United Nations Security Council for definitive action in November 2002.

By the unanimous vote of all members of the Security Council, Resolution 1441 was passed on 8 November 2002. This calls for Iraq to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, allow United Nations inspectors unrestricted access to any site in the country to verify that the destruction is taking place, and for Iraq to face "serious consequences" if it does not fully comply.

CURRENT ISSUES

The United States, Britain, and Australia have amassed a force of about 250,000 soldiers, pilots, and sailors around Iraq. This massive military presence is poised to attack if Iraq fails to meet the conditions of UN Resolution 1441.

There is no doubt that so much military power on his doorstep has got Saddam Hussein's attention. Weapons inspectors were allowed back into Iraq shortly after the passage of Resolution 1441. The chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, has reported an increase in Iraqi cooperation, and a number of missiles have been destroyed. However, the U.S. claims that Saddam Hussein is deceiving the inspectors and moving WMDs around to avoid detection.

U.S. President George W. Bush has repeatedly stated that he has run out of patience. He's probably right when he says that Saddam will lie and cheat at every opportunity in order to avoid meeting the conditions imposed on him by the United Nations.

The U.S. approach has been to push for the military option sooner rather than later. There are a number of reasons why the U.S. wants to move now, but the weather is an important one. By early April, it starts to get uncomfortably hot in Iraq. Because of fears that the Iraqi leader will order the use of chemical and/or biological weapons against invading troops, they will have to wear protective suits. The gear needed to protect a soldier from chemical and biological weapons is heavy, cumbersome, and hot. In temperatures of 35 to 40 degrees Celsius, someone wearing a protective suit would probably pass out or suffer heat stroke in a matter of minutes. Waiting until the cooler weather of winter is not a realistic option.

Keeping an army of 250,000 people in the field for six to nine months would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Holding such a large force in battle readiness for so long simply can't be done.

Pulling troops out would likely result in Saddam stalling on the disarmament process again. It is only the threat of imminent invasion that has caused him to cooperate.

So, a diplomatic struggle of epic proportions has been going on within the United Nations.

Initially, the Bush administration said it had all the authorization it needed to attack in Resolution 1441. It promises "serious consequences" if Iraq is in breach of the terms of the resolution. Iraq hasn't met all the conditions of Resolution 1441, therefore "serious consequences" are authorized.

Earlier UN resolutions that Iraq has failed to honour authorize the use of "all necessary means to uphold and implement" them. In the world of diplomacy, "all necessary means" is the code that permits the use of force.

The United States and its military allies, Australia and the United Kingdom, were all for attacking and seemed ready to do so by the middle of February 2003. That's when the people got their say.

All over the world, in megacities and villages and everything in between, ordinary citizens turned out to protest the use of force against Iraq. Nobody carried banners in support of Saddam Hussein; the people were concerned about the effect war would have on the civilians in Iraq.

The anti-war demonstrations were massive, with some individual marches attracting numbers in the millions.

Opinion polls around the world showed 70% and 80% of people against the use of the military option without a more explicit order from the United Nations. Give the inspections more time was the clear message.

The passion and size of the anti-war campaign seem to have shaken some of the pro-war leaders, particularly Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair. So, a decision was taken to go for a second UN resolution, one that specifically authorizes the use of force against Iraq.

This resolution has to be passed by the UN Security Council. There are 15 members of the Security Council; five are Permanent Members and the other ten seats rotate among members of the entire United Nations.

The Permanent Five are: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. If one of these votes against a resolution it cannot pass; this is called a veto.

But, suppose a resolution is not vetoed by any of the Permanent Five, it must still receive a majority of votes in the entire Security Council to pass. So, for a resolution to take effect it must get at least nine total votes and no veto from the Permanent Five.

Usually, by the time the Council gets to vote the issue has been decided. For a vote as important as the one authorizing the use of force against Iraq intense lobbying goes on behind the scenes. Draft resolutions are written and members of the Council are polled behind closed doors. Compromises may be written to get undecided votes onside.

In March 2003, U.S. and U.K. diplomats worked the Security Council members as they had never been worked before.

France took a strong stance against the use of force from the beginning. President Jacques Chirac said the United States had not made a sufficient case for war. He called for more time -- months if necessary -- for weapons inspectors to continue their work. Russia also signalled it would use its veto.

By mid-March 2003, the United States believed it was close to getting nine votes in favour of military action. The non-permanent members of the Security Council endured weeks of intense lobbying by both the pro-war and anti-war sides.

One of those countries is Guinea, a small, poverty-stricken nation on the west coast of Africa. Ordinarily, its President, Lansana Conte, would have a hard time getting an appointment with the third under-secretary of state for West Africa in Washington. Suddenly, he finds he's on George W. Bush's speed-dial list and the U.S. President wants to know how much money President Conte needs to improve the economic wellbeing of his people.

Is Mr. Conte going to tell the most powerful person in the world his vote is not for sale? President Conte might be morally opposed to a war on Iraq but voting along with the U.S. might open the door to massive aid. It's tempting.

And, Lansana Conte knows there is another side to the coin. If Guinea votes against the United States, it might find itself being punished in its trading arrangements with the world's biggest economy.

As this is written, the United States and the United Kingdom look unlikely to get their second resolution through the Security Council. George Bush has said he will attack anyway. The U.K.'s Prime Minister Tony Blair has said he wants that second resolution. If he authorizes force without it he will probably be finished as Britain's prime minister.

World public opinion has been clearly expressed as against the U.S. going-it-alone. Even U.S. public opinion is against an attack without a second resolution.

Attacking Iraq without the blessing of the United Nations would have very serious implications. Enormous damage has already been done to relations between the United States and its longtime allies in Europe.

American hardball diplomacy has alienated a lot of others.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United Nations have been torn apart because of the U.S. tactics in trying to bully everyone else into doing what it wants.

BLUEPRINT FOR CHANGE

George W. Bush has lost the battle for world public opinion. He was never held in very high regard by the rest of the world even before he became U.S. President. However, he and his fellow Americans gained enormous worldwide support after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. There was a huge outpouring of sympathy towards the U.S. as the victim of a handful of fringe maniacs. The French newspaper Le Monde carried a headline the following day that read "We Are All Americans." All that has gone now. Mr. Bush and his colleagues have squandered that deep pool of friendship towards the U.S.

All around the world, citizens have come to believe that U.S. policy has been aimed at eliminating Saddam Hussein since long before the collapse of the World Trade Centre.

Scotland's Sunday Herald newspaper has revealed the American plan. The newspaper has published details of a document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces, and Resources for a New Century. It was written in September 2000 by the conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC). And, it was produced for Mr. Bush's most trusted advisers; people such as Vice-President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, and others.

The Sunday Herald writes that, "The plan shows Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power. It says: `The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.'

"The PNAC document supports a `blueprint for maintaining global U.S. pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.'

"This `American grand strategy' must be advanced for `as far into the future as possible,' the report says. It also calls for the U.S. to `fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars' as a `core mission.'"

British Member of Parliament Tam Dalyell calls the PNAC document "garbage." He says: "This is a blueprint for U.S. world domination - a new world order of their making. These are the thought processes of [some] Americans who want to control the world. I am appalled that a British Labour Prime Minister (Tony Blair) should have got into bed with a crew which has this moral standing."

MORE TO BE FEARED THAN SADDAM?

The Kurdish people are spread over a wide area, part of which is in northern Iraq. There are about 26 million Kurdish and more than half of them live in southeastern Turkey. About 25% reside in northern Iran, and another 17% live in northwestern Iraq. The rest live in small pockets in Syria, Armenia, and several of the other republics that used to be part of the Soviet Union.

When they were a nomadic people, these areas were known as Kurdistan. Many Kurds dream of having their own homeland once again. These Kurdish nationalist aspirations have led to periods of intense conflict with the Iraqi government. A Kurdish rebellion was put down in 1975 when Iran agreed to stop supporting the Kurdish forces along its border with Iraq. Shortly thereafter, Iraq allegedly used chemical weapons to crush a Kurdish rebellion in the north.

When the Gulf War ended in 1991, most of the Kurds in Iraq lived in one of the no-fly zones. Under the protection of the United Nations they were able to rebuild their society after decades of persecution by Saddam Hussein. Today, this "nation without a state" has its own flag, its own army, and its own police. There are newspapers, television stations, and an elected parliament. At universities, self-confident Kurdish academics work on their doctoral theses. In schools, teaching is in Kurdish, with Arabic taught only as a second language, or even third after English.

Now, dread haunts Iraqi Kurdistan, where the Turks are hated more than Saddam and fear grows of a war within a war. For decades, Turkey has refused to acknowledge the existence of a Kurdish nationality or ethnicity. The 14 million or so Kurds whose homes are in Turkey are, according to the Turkish government, "southern Turks." But, these "southern Turks" have been a pesky nuisance for a tong time. They want more control over their own affairs and Turkey refuses to give it to them. So, they have taken up arms and have been fighting against the Turks in what has, at times, exploded into a full-blown war.

The Kurds in Iraq and their cousins in Turkey are fearful that Turkey will use a war in Iraq as cover for settling some old scores with the Kurds.

Most observers agree that Turkey views war with Iraq as a golden opportunity to prevent the creation of a Kurdish state in an area that has enjoyed 12 years of autonomy.

In the Kurdish view, Turkey's arrival would undermine the independence, in effect since 1991, of 3.5 million Kurds and their armed militias. They fear that once Turkish soldiers are in, they will never leave. They also worry that two other neighbours, Iran and Syria, might also invade to protect their Kurd-inhabited border regions.

"People in northern Iraqi Kurdistan are more afraid of the Turkish military than of Saddam," says Nasreen Sideek, Minister of Reconstruction and Development in the Kurdish administration.

Websites

The Iraq Foundation http://www.iraqfoundation.org/

Project for the New American Century http://www.newamericancentury.org/

UN Security Council Resolution 1441 - http://www.un.int/usa/sresiraq.htm

FACT FILE

During the Gulf War of 1991, Iraq fired Scud missiles loaded with high explosives at Israel and Saudi Arabia.

About two thirds of Iraq's people follow the Shiite branch of Islam, while the minority Sunni followers have held all power in the country for several decades.