Resistance Leadership Targeted As French Soldier Killed And Italian Forces Withdraw From Iraq

US Embassy in Baghdad being hit

  

From March 13-14 Iran targeted members of the anti-Islamic State Coalition in Irbil while the U.S. and Israel went after more leaders of the pro-Iran Resistance.

Review David Malone, The International Struggle Over Iraq, Politics in the UN Security Council 1980-2005, Oxford University Press, 2006

  

The International Struggle Over Iraq is a study by David Malone of the relationship between the United Nations, its permanent members and Iraq from the Iran-Iraq War to the U.S. occupation. The book is up and down in parts but the conclusions are sound. The author argues that from the 1980s-90s the U.N. was increasingly effective in dealing with Iraq because the great powers agreed on using it as a tool in their foreign policy but afterwards the U.S. and U.K. acted increasingly on their own sidelining the organization until it was largely irrelevant although Malone wouldn’t agree with that last point.

Review James Barr, A Line In The Sand, The Anglo-French Struggle For The Middle East, 1914-1948, W.W. Norton & Company, 2012

 

Barr, James, A Line In The Sand, The Anglo-French Struggle For The Middle East, 1914-1948, W.W. Norton & Company, 2012

 

In A Line In The Sand, The Anglo-French Struggle For The Middle East, 1914-1948 James Barr delves into the imperialist rivalry between England and France for control of the Middle East starting during World War I. When the war started the two powers wanted to carve up the Ottoman Empire with Paris having eyes on Syria and Lebanon and London on Iraq, Jordan and Palestine. Initially they agreed upon this division but then came into conflict. Barr presents a very interesting history of power politics, intrigue and terrorism that left neither nation happy.

Review Cairo 1921, Ten Days That Made the Middle East

Faught, C. Brad, Cairo 1921, Ten Days That Made the Middle East, Yale University Press, 2022

 

The 1921 Cairo conference held by British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill helped create the modern Middle East. Borders were drawn, kings were installed, and a new policy of neo-colonialism was created. That’s what C. Brad Faught’s Cairo 1921, Ten Days That Made the Middle East focuses upon.

Security In Iraq Remains Stable In August 2023

Security in Iraq has remained at the same level since February 2023. That’s due to the fact that the Islamic State is barely active in the country anymore. Pro-Iran groups have returned to the scene however.

Review Wings of Iraq: Volume 2: The Iraqi Air Force, 1970-1980

Cooper, Tom, Sipos, Milos, Wings of Iraq: Volume 2: The Iraqi Air Force, 1970-1980, Worwick: Helion & Company Limited, 2022

 

The second volume of the Wings of Iraq by Tom Cooper and Milos Sipos picks up right where the last one left off. The main topic is Iraq’s attempt to modernize its force after it found itself outclassed in the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israeli Wars. The air arm was split over whether to turn to the Soviets or France to accomplish this. The authors rely upon both Iraqi and Iranian sources plus many interviews with former Iraqi personnel. It provides the best coverage of this arm of the military published so far. The main takeaway was that Baghdad became completely reliant upon the USSR but Moscow was an unreliable partner.

Review Empires of the Sand, The Struggle For Mastery In The Middle East 1789-1923

Karsh, Efraim and Karsh, Inari, Empires of the Sand, The Struggle For Mastery In The Middle East 1789-1923, Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press, 2003

 

Empires of the Sand, The Struggle For Mastery In The Middle East 1789-1923 by Efraim and Inari Karsh attempts to dispel conventional wisdom about the creation of the modern Middle East. Many historians focus upon western imperialism as the main force during this period. The Karshes want to look at how local actors like the Ottomans, Sharif Hussein of the Hijaz and his son Faisal shaped events in conjunction with European powers. Their thesis is that the Middle East had a long history of cooperation and conflict with Europe which gave rise to the end of the Ottoman Empire and the emergence of the Arab states after World War I.

Chilcot Report Section 3.4 Development of UK Iraq Strategy and Options, Late July to 14 September 2002

Section 3.4 of the Chilcot Report focuses upon Prime Minister Tony Blair’s only victory in the lead up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That was when he convinced President Bush to go to the United Nations to get resolutions against Iraq that would help build a popular and legal case for war. Even then, there were questions whether this path would be successful.

Chilcot Report Section 3.2 Development of UK Iraq Strategy and Options, January to April 2002 – “Axis Of Evil” to Crawford

Section 3.1 of the Chilcot Report covers the British dealing with the aftermath of 9/11 and the Bush administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq. The Blair government naively believed that it could maintain its policy since the 1990s of containing Saddam via sanctions and demanding that U.N. weapons inspectors return. The Prime Minister’s decision to stand by President Bush however meant that he eventually agreed to use force against Iraq if everything else failed. That was England’s first step towards war.

Chilcot Report Section 3.4 Development of UK Iraq Strategy and Options, Late July to 14 September 2002

Section 3.4 of the Chilcot Report focuses upon Prime Minister Tony Blair’s only victory in the lead up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. That was when he convinced President Bush to go to the United Nations to get resolutions against Iraq that would help build a popular and legal case for war. Even then, there were questions whether this path would be successful.

Chilcot Report Section 3.2 Development of UK Iraq Strategy and Options, January to April 2002 – “Axis Of Evil” to Crawford

Section 3.1 of the Chilcot Report covers the British dealing with the aftermath of 9/11 and the Bush administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq. The Blair government naively believed that it could maintain its policy since the 1990s of containing Saddam via sanctions and demanding that U.N. weapons inspectors return. The Prime Minister’s decision to stand by President Bush however meant that he eventually agreed to use force against Iraq if everything else failed. That was England’s first step towards war.

Mosul Campaign Day 226 May 30 2017

There has been very slow progress since the last phase of the Mosul Battle began four days ago. Zinjali has been the only neighborhood where constant advances have been reported. A military school run by the Islamic State was captured. Army officers told Agence France Presse that things were moving very slowly in Shifa where there are several hospitals the Iraqi forces (ISF) were not trying to destroy. As usual, the insurgents are relying upon small units to carry out hit and run tactics. They fire upon the ISF and then move onto another position. During the day they launched two counterattacks, one in Bab al-Tob in the Old City, and another in Hawi Kanisa, which is a liberated area of west Mosul. Iraqi officials and members of the ISF were talking about expelling IS from the city in just a few days. That is probably overly optimistic as most Iraqi announcements are.

Mosul Campaign Day 82, Jan 6, 2017

The Iraqi forces (ISF) shifted their focus to northeast Mosul on January 6. The 16^th Division seized Mazare neighborhood, while the Golden Division took neighboring Muthanna. That effort began with a surprise night attack into Muthanna that was quickly surrounded. Army brigades also moved into the Hadbaa housing district, which is farther north.

In the southeast the Federal Police finally took the Salam Hospital in Wahda. Next to it the Jund al-Khalifah headquarters of the Islamic State was also seized. The ISF had been targeting the facility since the start of December. Hopefully this meant that the Wahda district in general was cleared of IS elements as well.

Yesterday a Hashd spokesman announced the 6^th stage of its operations in the Tal Afar district. The next day the Hashd took three towns. The insurgents launched a large assault upon the Tal Afar Airport, but were repulsed. The Hashd claimed they secured the Tal Keif road a few days ago, but they continue to shell IS checkpoints along it.

Much has been made of the increased U.S. support for the Mosul campaign. The Americans are not the only nationality involved in the coalition. The French have soldiers deployed with the Iraqi forces as well, and it was reported that it moved some of its artillery from the base in Qayara south of Mosul closer to the front to assist with the new push within the city.

Finally, Agence France Presse was the latest to cover the growing number of people being displaced within Mosul. It talked with a man who escaped west Mosul, which is under control of IS to Intisar in the southeast. He found an abandoned home there and took up residence. The man went on to stay that he did not want to go to a displacement camp calling it a prison because people were not allowed out. Many houses have multiple families inside of them as people are sheltering throughout the city while the battle to liberate it drags on for the fourth month. This process will only continue as the ISF moves deeper into the Mosul.

SOURCES

Al Alam, “Iraqi Army, Popular Forces Advance more in ISIS-Held Mosul City,” 1/6/17

- "Iraqi Forces Thwart ISIS Militants' Attack on Airport near Mosul City," 1/6/17

BBC, "Mosul battle: Iraqi troops 'take key district' from IS," 1/6/17

Buratha News, “Recent developments in the field during the process of liberating Mosul until 18:00 Friday 06 01 2017,” 1/6/17

- “Recent developments in the field during the process of liberating Mosul until 18:30 Friday 06 01 2017,” 1/6/17

Coles, Isabel and Hameed, Saif, “In renewed push, Iraqi forces enter Mosul from north for first time,” Reuters, 1/6/17

Decamme, Guillaume, “For Mosul displaced, shelter is often just down the road,” Agence France Presse, 1/6/17

Face Iraq, “Abdul Wahab al-Saadi: joint forces engaged in heavy fighting for freeing all of the east side of Mosul from Daesh,” 1/6/17

- “French troops deployed artillery guns to hit Daesh strongholds in the center of Mosul,” 1/6/17

- “Military source: forces took control of the road linking the city of Mosul and Tal Skeif,” 1/1/17

- “Security forces continue operations against Daesh terrorists within Ninewa,” 1/6/17

Al Forat, "Federal Police control Salam Hospital in Mosul," 1/6/17

- "Seventh Brigade freed Ahmed and Malah villages southeast of Mosul," 1/6/17

Al Maalomah, "Popular Crowd frees Al Beefij west of Mosul," 1/6/17

- “Security forces free apartments in Hadbaa area north Mosul,” 1/6/17

Al Mada, "Iraqi army frees Mazare district north Mosul," 1/6/17

Al Masalah, “Popular Crowd frees two villages southwest of Mosul,” 1/6/17

Reuters, “Iraqi forces advance against Islamic State in Mosul night raid: spokesman,” 1/6/17

Rudaw, “Iraqi forces cross the Khosr River in east Mosul,” 1/6/17

Mosul Campaign Day 52, Dec 7, 2016

The Iraqi forces (ISF) faced a mixture of continued advances and setbacks in its fighting in eastern Mosul. On the positive side, the Golden Division supported by a unit from the 16^th Division freed Noor, Muthanna and Siha. That marked the 55^th neighborhood reached so far in the city. The 9^th Division and a SWAT unit and the Golden Division also attacked Masarif and Salam, both of which were freed twice before. On the negative side, the 9^th Division made a thrust into southeast Mosul reaching the Salam Hospital in the Wahda neighborhood on December 6. It appeared that the ISF was trying to make a pincer movement and surround the central section of the Left Coast of the city. On December 7 the Islamic State launched a determined counterattack and drove the ISF out of the hospital. An armored unit and troops from the Golden Division had to be sent in to rescue the soldiers stuck in the hospital and secure their escape. An officer told Reuters that it appeared the insurgents let them into the neighborhood so that they could be ambushed. In the process the 9^th Division had to withdraw from the Wahda and Sumer areas. There is still no movement on the northern and southern fronts. The previous two days the southern neighborhoods were shelled, but there was no such news on December 7. Instead, Al Mada reported that the army is still waiting for the order to move out and attack the Mosul airport.

In the west the Hashd attacked the town of Tal Faris. It has also had a hard time controlling the Tal Afar to Mosul road. The Hashd units are still waiting for the army and police to organize a force to take Tal Afar itself. Until then the Hashd are trying to hold the roads and clearing the towns in the area.

Iraq Oil Report in its daily journal, “Inside Mosul” noted that IS is forcing civilians from the Bakr, Mithaq and Tamim neighborhoods into the western side of the city. The militants were threatening to kill people if they didn’t leave. They are likely to be used as human shields.

Finally, Reuters ran a story that Iran, Russia and France played a role in the Mosul campaign plan. Originally, the northern, eastern, and southern sides of Mosul were to be taken leaving an escape route to the west to Syria for civilians and IS fighters to flee. A similar tactic was used in previous sieges in Iraq. Tehran, Moscow and Paris objected. The first two did not want Islamic State men moving into Syria where they could be used to fight the Assad government, which the two countries support. France on the other hand, wanted to eliminate as many IS members as possible in Mosul fearing future terrorist attacks. As a result of this lobbying the Hashd were sent west to cut off Mosul from all sides. A negative consequence of this revision is that there are hundreds of thousands of civilians trapped within the city, which has greatly complicated the fighting as they have been used as human shields, and have stopped the ISF from using its heavy firepower. It has also left IS with no other choice but to fight to the death as few can expect to escape if they tried.

SOURCES

Bas News, "Iraqi Forces Approaching Center of Mosul," 12/7/16

- "Iraqi Forces Retake Two More Neighborhoods Eastern Mosul," 12/6/16

Evans, Dominic, Chmaytelli, Maher and Markey, Patrick, “How Iran closed the Mosul ‘horseshoe’ and changed Iraq war,” Reuters, 12/7/16

Al Forat, "Popular Mobilization Forces initiate attack on the southern village of Tal Faris western Mosul," 12/7/16

Iraq Oil Report, "Inside Mosul, Dec. 7, 2016," 12/7/16

- "Inside Mosul: Nov. 6, 2016," 11/6/16

- "Inside Mosul, Nov. 25, 2016," 11/25/16

Al Mada, “Revision to the plan to liberate Mosul and Tal Afar from Daesh,” 12/7/16

Mostafa, Mohamed, “Iraqi troops withdraw as ISIS attacks leave deaths in Mosul,” Iraqi News, 12/7/16

Rasheed, Ahmed, “Islamic State attacks Iraqi soldiers in Mosul,” Reuters, 12/7/16

Rojkan, Mira, "Joint Forces Continue to Advance, Liberating More Areas in Mosul," Bas News, 12/4/16

Xinhua, "Iraqi forces gain ground, fight heavy clashes with IS militants in Mosul," 11/29/16

Mosul Campaign Day 50, Dec 5, 2016

The Golden Division claimed activity in two parts of east Mosul. The Tahrir neighborhood was freed for the third time. Barid was also attacked. That area was first entered on November 30. The Iraqi forces have found it difficult to maintain control of many of the neighborhoods on the frontline because of Islamic State counterattacks and infiltration. It has become part of the back and forth nature of the operation that neighborhoods change hands several times. Overall, more areas are being attacked and freed it has just been a slow and very difficult process.

There was activity on other fronts as well. In the north the Iraqi forces liberated three towns. In the south at least one neighborhood of Mosul was struck by artillery. The Iraqi police said that they were not close enough to fire on the city yet. A military source claimed that the fire was coming from French artillery. There has been very little activity on these two fronts for weeks now. They are hopefully beginning to ramp up for another push on the city to help relieve the pressure on those forces that are already inside Mosul in the east.

Inside Mosul there was internal displacement going on. A major in a SWAT outfit said that the Islamic State went through three areas of east Mosul and forced residents from their homes to convert them into battle positions. Al Jazeera on the other hand was in Zahra where it talked with people who said families were fleeing from convict zones into other people’s homes in the district. Talking with a clinic set up in a house in Samah Al Jazeera also heard that up to 50 people, mostly civilians were being wounded a day from the fighting.

Finally, U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter told the press that Mosul could fall before Donald Trump was inaugurated president on January 20, 2017. That is a little more time than Prime Minister Haidar Abadi has talked about as he has set a date for the end of this year. Still, neither is probably right as it looks like taking the city will be a very drawn out fight.

SOURCES

Ali, Idrees, “Recapture of Mosul ‘possible’ before next U.S. administration: Pentagon chief,” Reuters, 12/5/16

Bas News, "Iraqi Forces Retake Two More Neighborhoods East of Mosul," 11/17/16

Beck, John, “Mosul residents ‘won’t leave’ despite dire conditions,” Al Jazeera, 12/5/16

Evans, Dominic and Rasheed, Ahmed, “West Mosul shelled as Iraq steps up fight against Islamic State,” Reuters, 12/5/16

Iraq Oil Report, "Inside Mosul: Nov. 5, 2016," 11/5/16

- "Inside Mosul, Nov. 30, 2016," 11/30/16

Mostafa, Mohamed, "Security recapture 8 Mosul villages, Hashd rescue 200 families," Iraqi News, 12/5/16

Rudaw, "Fierce clashes in Mosul as army tries to push into new neighborhoods to evict ISIS," 12/5/16

When The World Remembered It Armed The New Hitler Saddam

In the lead up to the 1991 Gulf War President George Bush began comparing Saddam Hussein to Adolf Hitler. According to the president both men invaded their neighbors and ran cruel dictatorships. The inconvenient truth was that the U.S. and its allies wanted closer ties with Iraq for decades seeing it as an important Middle East power. As part of that policy the West sold Iraq the agents, technology and know how to build its chemical, biological, and nuclear programs. In the wake of Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 these was a new round of reporting on just how eager the West was to arm the dictator it was now denouncing.

France was Iraq’s second largest arms supplier. While most of its tanks and small arms came from Russia, Baghdad liked to purchase its high-tech equipment from France. In 1975 Saddam who was then Iraq’s vice president made his first overseas trip to Paris to sign an arms contract. (1) From 1975-1987 France sold Baghdad 135 Mirage fighters jets, 140 helicopters, 200 AMX tanks, 900 Panhard armored cars, 1,800 Milan anti-tank missiles, 900 Exocent air to ground missiles and other equipment. Eventually, 1/3 of Paris’ arms exports were going to Iraq. France was also involved in Iraq’s nuclear program signing a deal in 1976 to provide a nuclear reactor, which was capable of producing plutonium from a bomb. Successive French governments thought selling weapons to Iraq was important to gain influence in the Middle East. It was so intent upon building this relationship that it had no problem advancing Iraq’s nuclear program.

The United States had an arms embargo on Iraq during the 1980s, but that didn’t stop it from exporting dual use equipment to Baghdad. During the Iran-Iraq War the U.S. decided to improve relations with Baghdad out of fear of Iran. In November 1984 the Reagan administration restored full diplomatic relations with Saddam’s government. (2) From 1985-1990 Iraq bought $730 million worth of high-tech goods that were used for Iraq’s nuclear, missiles, and chemical and biological warfare programs. One such example was American Type Culture Collection, which sent anthrax and four other viruses to Iraq. (3) The U.S. provided software that was used to develop Iraq’s Super Gun, technology and glass fiber for missiles, along with parts and equipment for its uranium enrichment program and centrifuges used to develop nuclear weapons. (4) During the Iran-Iraq War Washington had no problem with Iraq working on these programs as it wanted a counter weight to Iran. By the time of the Gulf War however, these programs were seen as a major threat to the region and America’s allies there.

Germany was another major contributor to Iraq’s WMD and nuclear programs. It was reported that German firms provided Iraq with 90% of its chemical weapons capabilities. (5) Plalto-Kuehn G.m.b.H. sold agents that were used in biological research. (6) Karl Kolb became the chief supplier of agents to produce nerve and mustard gas. It also helped build plants, which it claimed were for pesticide, but an investigation revealed that the company knew they were for WMD all along. Water Engineering Trading provided parts for the Muthanna facility that was Iraq’s largest WMD factory, and also helped build a nerve gas plant in Fallujah. (7) In 1987 it signed a deal to send 100 technicians to help with the facility. Gildemeister Projects, Messerschmitt-Boelkow-Blohm, and H&H Metalform all helped build the Saad 16 plant that worked on both chemical and nuclear weapons. Saarstahl sold special metals to Iraq for its centrifuges, H&H Metalform sold lathes cut from special steel from, and magnets came from Inwako all for its nuclear program. (8) Iraq began its chemical, biological, and nuclear programs in the 1970s. It was completely dependent upon foreign know how and technology to develop them. Germany was one of the largest providers for all of those needs.

Without the West Iraq’s nuclear and WMD programs would not have been possible. It provided almost all of the raw materials to build these programs. When the Iran-Iraq War concluded in 1988 many of these ties were exposed, but Europe and the U.S. were more interested in seeking better ties with Saddam. When Iraq invaded Kuwait that all changed, and Iraq’s chemical, biological, and nuclear programs were part of the reason why Saddam was considered so dangerous. The media once again brought up that they were only possible due to the help of the west, but like in the 80s that didn’t seem to matter.

FOOTNOTES

1. Kaplan, Bernard, “Arms deals return to haunt the French,” San Francisco Examiner, 9/7/90

2. Gugliotta, Guy, Babcock, Charles and Weiser, Benjamin, “The Ties That Blind,” Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 9/24-30/90

3. Bradsher, Keith, “Senator Says U.S. Allowed Export Of Lethal Viruses to Iraq in 80’s,” New York Times, 2/10/94

4. Sinai, Ruth, “Saddam arsenal got a lot from U.S.,” Associated Press, 11/1/92

5. Smolowe, Jill, “Who Armed Baghdad?” Time, 2/11/91

6. Kempe, Frederick, “Supplying Saddam Germans Had Big Role In Helping Iraq Arm, Internal Report Shows,” Wall Street Journal, 10/2/90

7. Pletka, Danielle, “Firms Sell Saddam, Qaddafi the Deadly Means to an End,” Insight, 11/26/90

8. Reichlin, Igor and Maremont, Mark with Kapstein, Jonathan, Levine, Jonathan, “Iraq’s Silent Allies In Its Quest For The Bomb,” Business Week, 1/14/91

SOURCES

American Experience, “The Persian Gulf War”

Borger, Gloria and Hedges, Stephen with Stanglin, Douglas, “When the enemy is us,” U.S. News & World Report, 2/18/91

Bradsher, Keith, “Senator Says U.S. Allowed Export Of Lethal Viruses to Iraq in 80’s,” New York Times, 2/10/94

Ehrmann, Eric and Barton, Christopher, “Who Helped Arm Saddam?” Christian Science Monitor, 1/29/91

Gugliotta, Guy, Babcock, Charles and Weiser, Benjamin, “The Ties That Blind,” Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 9/24-30/90

Kaplan, Bernard, “Arms deals return to haunt the French,” San Francisco Examiner, 9/7/90

Kempe, Frederick, “Supplying Saddam Germans Had Big Role In Helping Iraq Arm, Internal Report Shows,” Wall Street Journal, 10/2/90

New York Times, “How Iraq blazes a trail to nukes,” Sacramento Bee, 12/23/90

Pletka, Danielle, “Firms Sell Saddam, Qaddafi the Deadly Means to an End,” Insight, 11/26/90

Reichlin, Igor and Maremont, Mark with Kapstein, Jonathan, Levine, Jonathan, “Iraq’s Silent Allies In Its Quest For The Bomb,” Business Week, 1/14/91

Sinai, Ruth, “Saddam arsenal got a lot from U.S.,” Associated Press, 11/1/92

Smolowe, Jill, “Who Armed Baghdad?” Time, 2/11/91

Iraq’s Use Of Chemical Weapons In Iran-Iraq War And Their Western Origin

Several western countries and companies assisted Iraq when it set out to build its chemical weapons programs in the 1970s. A decade later when Baghdad would use those systems in the Iran-Iraq War, those same nations were largely quiet giving their implicit support to Iraq. The press however was quite active in uncovering where Iraq’s WMD came from.

Two years into the Iran-Iraq War the Iraqi government began turning to chemical weapons. After quick victories in the opening months of the conflict, Saddam Hussein made the strategic mistake of halting offensive operations and attempting to negotiate a ceasefire. When that failed the two sides settled into a grinding war of attrition with Tehran holding a huge population advantage. One of Iraq’s responses was to use chemical weapons.

Iraq’s use of chemical weapons increased in both its application and tactical planning as the war progressed. In 1982 Iraq used tear gas on Iranian troops, followed by the deployment of chemical agents the following year. Their first major use was in the Val Fajr II campaign in the summer of 1983 when mustard gas was deployed. In early 1984 the Iraqi military was using tabun in the Khaybar I campaign in Basra. By the end of the war Iraq was using its chemical stockpiles more and more to deadlier effect. There was no effort to stop Baghdad because it had the support of so many powerful countries.

From the start Iran complained about Iraq’s use of these deadly materials, but the major powers remained silent. Starting in 1983 Tehran tried to publicize Iraq’s chemical weapons programs going to the press and international organizations, but they were initially ignored. The Soviet Union was the largest provider of weapons to Iraq before the war, and almost all the munitions filled with WMD and used in the war originated in the USSR. Moscow had also trained Iraqi forces in the use of biological and chemical weapons starting in the 1960s. Iran singled out Russia in 1984 as a major military supporter of Baghdad including chemical agents, but the Communist government said nothing in response. Later in the year when the United Nations decided to send a team to Iran to investigate the use of WMD, the Soviets objected. France was Saddam’s second largest military supporter and said nothing about the use of chemical weapons. Its two largest newspapers even suggested that Iranians had been injured in factory accidents rather than by Iraqi chemicals. The United States was slightly different. Some members in Congress were opposed to Saddam’s regime and brought up the WMD issue. That led the State Department to condemn their use in 1984. The Reagan administration however was helping Iraq early on in the war, and towards the end of the conflict provided intelligence for Iraqi operations that they knew would include the use of mustard gas and other agents. As Javed Ali wrote in 2001 for The Nonproliferation Review by the end of the war everyone knew Saddam was using chemical agents, but no government was interested in holding Iraq responsible let alone punishing it. That was because so much of the international community was opposed to Iran and its new government, which had just held American diplomats at the U.S. embassy for over a year and was talking about exporting its Islamic revolution. There was another factor for why the world turned a blind eye, the Americans and Europe had assisted Iraq with its WMD.

The United States press was especially good at revealing how America and Europe had helped Iraq build its chemical program. The Washington Post (1) for example documented how in 1975 Baghdad contacted the Pfaudler Company in New York to build a pesticide plant in Samarra. It started the work, but never finished it when it became suspicious about why the Iraqi Agriculture Ministry wanted it to produce four toxic agents that were very close to nerve gas. Germany’s Karl Kolb eventually completed the factory in the 1980s. It became known as the Muthanna State Establishment, and was the country’s largest producer of WMD. The Wall Street Journal (2) uncovered that a U.S. subsidiary of Belgium’s Phillips Petroleum sold pesticide to Iraq in 1983 that was used to produce mustard gas. The paper also found that Germany’s W.E.T. G.m.b.H. sold the Iraqi government $10 million worth of equipment and agents that were also used for nerve gas. These were just a few of many other instances of companies supplying Saddam’s WMD programs. Washington and Berlin actually tried to stop many of these transactions and put in a series of export controls, but because much of the equipment and agents could be used in regular commercial activities there were too many loopholes for these regulations to work.

In the 1980s Iraq had the backing of Europe and America to use weapons of mass destruction against Iran. Both eastern and western European countries had long standing ties with Iraq and saw it as an important market for its weapons and influence in the Middle East. The United States tilted towards Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War because it wanted to contain the Iranian revolution. That was why there was never any serious effort to stop Baghdad when it began using chemical weapons against Tehran. Even when those countries began being exposed as the source for much of the equipment and agents that would lead to Iraq’s WMD programs there was no real change in policy. Ironically, just a few years later the West would change its stance after the Gulf War and want to disarm Iraq, and there would be another round of media on just where these unconventional weapons came from.

FOOTNOTES

1. Ignatius, David, “Iraq’s Protracted Hunt for Chemical Weapons,” Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 10/3-9/88

2. Fialka, John, “Fighting Dirty Western Industry Sells Third World the Means To Produce Poison Gas,” Wall Street Journal, 9/16/88

SOURCES

Ali, Javed, “Chemical Weapons and the Iran-Iraq War: A Case Study in Noncompliance,” The Nonprolfieration Review, Spring 2001

Central Intelligence Agency, “Impact and Implications of Chemical Weapons Use I the Iran-Iraq War,” Spring 1988

Fialka, John, “Fighting Dirty Western Industry Sells Third World the Means To Produce Poison Gas,” Wall Street Journal, 9/16/88

Guthrie, Richard, “A Chronology of Events Relating to Iraq and Chemical & Biological Weapons 1984,” April 2007

Harris, Shane and Aid, Matthew, “Exclusive. CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran,” Foreign Policy, 8/26/13

Hersh, Seymour, “U.S. Secretly Gave Aid to Iraq Early in its War Against Iran,” New York Times, 1/26/92

Ignatius, David, “Iraq’s Protracted Hunt for Chemical Weapons,” Washington Post National Weekly Edition, 10/3-9/88

Kessler, Glenn, “History lesson: When the United States looked the other way on chemical weapons,” Washington Post, 9/4/13

New York Times, “U.N. Panel Says Iraq Used Gas on Civilians,” 8/24/87

Oygarden, Randi Hunshamar, “Chemical Weapons and the Iran-Iraq War, A discussion of the UN Security Council’s response to the use of gas in the Iran-Iraq war 1980-1988,” MA Thesis in History, University of Bergensis, Autumn 2014

Rajaee, Farhang editor, The Iran-Iraq War: The Politics of Aggression, Gainseville: University Press of Florida, 1993

HISTORY CHANNEL VIDEO: Israeli Airstrike On Iraqi Nuclear Reactor 1981

ITN VIDEO: Iraq Inquiry: Goldsmith Talks UN Resolution 1441

BBC PANORAMA VIDEO: Iraq, Tony Blair And The Truth