Foreign aid/Involvement
In what ways was the Iranian military stronger than the Iraqi military? (Which branch of the military? Was there any foreign aid?)
Iran used its relations with the West to develop a complex inventory of weapons. Iran dominated air warfare with planes provided by the US. US aid allowed Iran to stage a successful defense.
How did the characteristics of both Khomeini and Saddam Hussein’s leadership influence the war?
-Khomeini was over ambitious by attacking Iraq again
-Khomeini was a movement leader not used to his words carrying geopolitical weight and threats
-Saddam had a tendency to rush into battle without thinking-Khuzestan
What were the ways in which Kuwaitis resisted the Iraqi occupation? How did class/immigration background play a role?
Work boycott, withheld resources from armed troops, volunteer work, smuggling medical supplies, secret meetings, hiding foreigners, removing street signs, pamphlets. Lots of Palestinians refused to leave. Lower class people and those with less resources were less likely to be able to participate due to their precarious situation in society.
To what extent did Arab nationalism fuel the Baath party and Saddam Hussein’s campaigns for power?
Arab nationalism greatly influenced the movement as an anti-imperialist ideology with the goal of forming a unified Arab state. Belief that the Arab peoples should be profiting off their industries and oil wealth rather than imperialists superpowers. The movement’s greatest flaw was neglecting Islamic values, thereby alienating many groups of religious Iraqis. Saddam built his leadership on this ideology of radical nationalism.
What does the perspective of an eyewitness account reveal about the occupation that a more analytical essay does not?
It reveals the cruelty of the occupation and the magnitude of many occupation actions which through an analytical lens may not seem so bad (traffic stops). It also portrays the fear and confusion Kuwaiti people felt of the invasion. Saddam’s goal of forcing Kuwaitis to join an Iraqi state was massively unpopular.
How did the US’s bureaucratic system worsen the conflict in Kuwait?
Bureaucrats and state officials actively ignored Middle East experts, the administration assumed that the Iraqi invasion was illogical (misunderstanding that long standing border dispute), CIA’s bureaucratically driven perspective that an Arab state would not attack another Arab state/Iraq wouldn’t risk war with Israel(misinformed, Israel had assured Iraq that they wouldn’t attack), belief of lower level bureaucrats/senior advisors that Iraq was still an ally
Was Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait a victory: militaristically? Ideologically?
Iraqis were able to acquire Kuwaiti oil reserves and occupy this new region. Ideologically, Kuwaitis saw no reason to support Saddam’s plan for a unified Pan-Arab state with his occupation forces being violent and cruel. This meant the land would only yield resources and not a unified people joining the Iraqi state. The invasion also meant Iraq would soon face an alliance of many nations: its greatest military challenge yet.
Did the Kurds pose a real threat to Saddam’s rising power or did they lack resources and troops to mount a significant defense on Iraq?
When supported by Iran, they posed a threat with the Revolt, however with the US's empty promise of support, they were slaughtered. Ideologically, however, they did, as they composed a large portion of the population in the north, thus threatening Saddam's vision of a unified Arab state.
Was Saddam’s move to occupy Kuwait a tactical one for resources(what resources?) or fueled by Saddam’s plan for a non-aligned Pan-Arab state?
Both played a role in the invasion: Saddam wanted to acquire Kuwait’s oil wealth as well as absolve debts Iraq owed to Kuwait. It seems that Saddam was also driven by an extreme hunger for more power and land. He saw Kuwait as a possible actor in the proposed non-alignment, Pan-Arab state.
What idea is the author trying to refute in the Operation Desert Storm reading? What conclusion do they come to?
The author is trying to refute the idea that Bush was the sole cause for the US’s involvement in the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait by taking the stance that bureaucratic influence affected Bush’s decision to a greater extent than previously thought.