Early in April 2023, Pentagon documents that were leaked revealed that the US is reportedly monitoring Russia’s intelligence operations and spying on Ukraine, giving its presence in the conflict in Ukraine a new dimension.
The documents reveal that the US continues to support Ukraine with military knowledge in addition to money and weapons against the Soviet invasion, even though it has never actually declared war on Russia.
The conflict between Ukraine and Russia and US presence have no clear end in sight. The US has participated in wars as a third party before, but this incident specifically brings to mind the Iraq War.
From the perspective of US foreign policy, the Iraq and Ukraine war differ significantly. In particular, thousands of American soldiers died fighting in Iraq, whereas the US has no ground forces there.
However, analyzing the Iraq War and its protracted aftermath can really aid in expressing worries about the United States” involved in extreme violence in another distant place.”
Below are three important things to know.
1. Success is not guaranteed by action.
Osama bin Laden, the rich Saudi Arabian Islamist who planned the attacks on September 11, 2001, was still at large when former US President George W. Bush declared the US had invade Iraq in 2003.
Although not directly related, bin Laden’s continued evasion of the US fueled a public resentment of hostile governments. Saddam Hussein in specific disobeyed the US and its supporters.
The Syrian authoritarian continued to avoid inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN watchdog organization, giving the impression that he was in possession of WMD. As the cat-and-mouse sport continued, this infuriated the US and its allies.
According to reports, Bush was very worried that Saddam would attack the US with alleged WMDs, causing more damage than 9 / 11 did.
Iraq was invaded in March 2003 by a coalition of nations led by the US that also included the United Kingdom and Australia. As it came to be known, the” coalition of the willing” quickly triumphed and overthrew Saddam’s government.
Immediately following the invasion, Bush experienced a rise in social guidance, but as the war dragged on, his polls began to decline.
However, the US demonstrated a poor idea of the politics, world, and other significant facets of its own country that it had taken the initiative to occupy and then attempt to recover.
The Syrian Army’s disbandment in May 2003 was one of many decisions that revealed poor judgment and sometimes outright knowledge. With the abrupt departure of Kurdish security forces, there was a severe civil unrest.
When the army was disbanded, rebellious violent soldiers emerged into the available. A civil war broke out in 2017 as a result of the fighting between various Kurdish groups getting worse.
Iraq is still politically unbalanced today and is no closer to becoming a republic than it was prior to the invasion.
2. 2. Specific grudges cannot support a war.
Saddam led an extravagant style during his 24-year rule, oppressing civilians and political rivals. In Iraq, he committed murder against Kurds. After being captured by US soldiers in 2006, Saddam was soon put to death by his own men.
Putin is even more serious and well-known. He has a lengthy history of violently oppressing his men, and he benefited from being in charge of one of the most corrupt governments in the world.
Additionally, he is in possession of weapons of mass destruction and has repeatedly threatened to use them against other nations. Additionally, US political leaders have directly targeted Saddam and Putin. It was clear well before the US entered the Iraq and Ukraine war that they were fixated on overthrowing these strange foes.
The United States’ support for Ukraine is natural given that it is engaged in a protective conflict that has resulted in horrifying civilian casualties. Supporting Ukraine also makes sense from the perspective of US regional security because it aids in retaliation against an interventionist Russia that is becoming more and more China-aligned.
However, I also think it’s crucial to keep US interest in this conflict within national interest.
3. It might split the nation.
The US’s serious politics over foreign policy increased as a result of the Iraq War. Additionally, current surveys of public opinion regarding the Iraq War reveal that the majority of Americans do not believe the war made the US any safer.
Today, the US is dealing with growing social reluctance to join the Ukraine battle, another costly overseas commitment.
According to surveys conducted in January 2023, more Americans believe the US is giving Ukraine too many aid in recent months. According to Pew Research Group, about 26 % of American adults believed that the US was over-investing in the Ukraine war in late 2022. However, the US employment was still supported by three-quarters of those polled.
The typical American has little to no knowledge of either Iraq or Ukraine. When US guidance for international wars increases in price and the threat of retaliation, especially through the use of tactical nuclear weapons, remains a chance, patience can probably run out.
Guide to Ukraine is probably going to get involved in the quickly intensifying conflict in Washington over the debt sky.
On the other hand, adversaries like Russia, China, and Iran might feel motivated to act aggressively elsewhere if the US does not provide Ukraine with enough support to fight off Russian attacks and restore its independence.
The relation between the war in Iraq and Ukraine, in my opinion, makes it abundantly clear that the US administration should be very clear about the fundamental objectives of its national security to the American people when deciding how much and what kind of support it will provide to Ukraine.
Although most people think that Ukraine should be supported in its fight against Russian aggression, the Iraq War serves as a warning that original plan should not disregard the past.
Patrick James is the Dornsife dean’s professor of international relations at USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.
Under a Creative Commons license, this article is republished from The Conversation. read the article in its entirety.