Review Karsh, Efraim,
The Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988, Oxford:
Osprey, 2002
Osprey’s Essential Histories series gives brief reviews of some
of the major conflicts in the world from ancient times to the present. Its
offering on the Iran-Iraq War has less than 100 pages in text. While it goes
over the major battles and explains how senseless the war was, it’s main
problem is that it gives an Iraqi centered explanation for how things started.
According to author Efraim Karsh the Iran-Iraq War was the
result of Tehran’s threat to Saddam Hussein. In 1979 Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini came into power, began talking about exporting Iran’s revolution, and
how Iraq was a barrier to achieving that goal. As a result, Tehran urged Iraqis
to overthrow Saddam, armed the Kurds, and backed Shiite opposition parties that
carried out a series of assassination attempts against the Iraqi leadership.
Iraq on the other hand, was conciliatory towards the revolutionary government
at first, but then due to its actions cracked down on its Shiite population and
supported opponents to Khomeini. That escalated to border skirmishes and then
heaving fighting, and eventually Iraq’s invasion in September 1980. Karsh
claims that Saddam was a reluctant warrior and only wanted to fend off the
threat of Iran. As a result, Iraq only had the limited goal of cutting off the
Shatt al-Arab waterway that was Iraq’s only access to the Persian Gulf. That
doomed Baghdad, because it stopped before it had achieved a decisive victory
over the Iranian military allowing it to regroup and carry on with the war. This
is a completely Iraq centric view of the causes, and therefore only tells part
of the story. Baghdad was open to the new Iranian government at first, and
Khomeini responded by calling for Saddam being deposed and started border
clashes. Iraq however, was not just on the defensive. The Revolutionary Command
Council met right before the invasion and Saddam said that it was time to seize
the Shatt al-Arab waterway because Iran was weak and would not fight back. He
also hoped the invasion would spark a revolt or at least the Arabs in Khuzistan
province would rise up and back Iraq. Karsh attributes Iraq’s modest goal to
the fact that Saddam did not really want to go to war, when it was the exact
opposite. There’s also no explanation on how taking the Shatt al-Arab was
supposed to stop the problems Khomeini posed. Ironically, in the conclusion the
author notes that Iraq did have larger goals, so it wasn’t so constrained.
What the book does a better job on is going through the
major campaigns, providing good maps, and explaining how futile the war was.
Iraq failed in one of its major goals on the first day of the invasion when it
did not destroy Iran’s air force on the ground. In less than a month it got
bogged down. After a short stalemate, Iran went on the offensive in 1981, and
held the initiative for the next six years. Instead of using the successful
tactics it employed to blunt the Iraqi thrusts initially it turned to human
wave attacks by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, largely because of the
political support it had within Tehran’s leadership. Iran had as much luck as
Iraq did and suffered devastating losses on top of that. Karsh called it a battle
of incompetents. Bad leadership, inexperienced troops, the inability to
maintain its forces and other factors meant neither side was able to deliver a
knockout punch and win the war. Instead the two signed a ceasefire that
maintained the status quo after eight bloody years.
Due to the poor analysis at the start The Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988 cannot be recommended. There are better
books to turn to for a starter explaining the conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment