Iran-Iraq War
I | INTRODUCTION |
Iran-Iraq
War, armed conflict that began when Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980
and ended in August 1988 after both sides accepted a cease-fire sponsored by the
United Nations (UN). The war was one of the longest and most destructive of the
20th century, with likely more than one million casualties. Despite the
conflict's length and cost, neither Iran nor Iraq made significant territorial
or political gains, and the fundamental issues dividing the countries remained
unresolved at the end of the war.
II | BACKGROUND |
The border between Iraq and Iran has been
contested diplomatically and sometimes militarily for several centuries. After
the Ottoman Empire conquered present-day Iraq in 1534, making it the easternmost
part of its empire, Iran, its eastern neighbor, became a frequent rival. More
recently, when Iraq was made a separate state in the aftermath of World War I
(1914-1918), Iraq and Iran disagreed sharply over the precise border between
them, especially in the area of the Shatt al Arab, a river channel providing
Iraq's only outlet to the sea, via the Persian Gulf. In 1937 the two sides came
to an agreement establishing a boundary that gave Iraq control of the Shatt al
Arab.
Despite the border agreement, relations
between Iran and Iraq continued to suffer periodic crises for two reasons.
First, although Iraq is predominantly Arab and Iran is predominantly Persian,
the border still cut across some political loyalties. In the north, a large
population of Kurds (who are neither Arab nor Persian) straddled both sides of
the border. Along the southern part of the border, an Arab minority inhabited
the Iranian province of Khūzestān among a Persian majority. Furthermore, the
largest portion of the Iraqi population is Shia Muslim (see Shia Islam),
as is the majority of the Iranian population. Shia religious leaders at odds
with the secular (nonreligious) government of their own country sometimes sought
refuge in the other, straining Iranian-Iraqi relations. The most prominent
refugee was Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, a leading Shiae religious scholar who
settled in Iraq after being exiled from Iran in 1964.
The second reason Iran and Iraq continued to
suffer crises was that both countries were politically unstable. When either
Iran or Iraq experienced a revolution or coup, the other country would exploit
the troubled country’s political weakness to gain a diplomatic advantage. As
Western countries, especially the United Kingdom, gradually lost influence in
the area in the mid-20th century, both Iran and Iraq felt freer to pursue more
ambitious foreign policies, unhindered (and at times even supported) by external
powers. By the beginning of the 1970s both Iran and Iraq sought broader
influence in the region. Under Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, Iran felt it could
assert its authority in the area, partly with the backing of the United States.
Iraq, governed by the Arab nationalist regime of Major General Ahmed Hassan
al-Bakr, sought to unite and strengthen the Arab world and reject Western
influence. These opposing views created a bitter rivalry between the neighboring
countries.
III | PRELUDE TO WAR |
In the early 1970s Iraq's Kurdish population
rebelled against the country's government, and Iran joined several other
countries in supporting the insurgency. At peace talks in Algiers, Algeria, in
1975, Iran agreed to abandon its support for the Kurdish rebellion in return for
an agreement by Iraq to share the Shatt al Arab waterway with Iran. Thereafter,
the border between Iran and Iraq was drawn down the middle of the Shatt al Arab
rather than along its eastern (Iranian) bank as agreed in 1937.
In January 1979 followers of Ayatollah
Khomeini led a revolution that toppled the shah. The following month, Khomeini
returned to Iran and began to take control of the new government. In April,
after a popular referendum, Khomeini declared the establishment of an Islamic
republic. The revolution posed what seemed to be both an enormous opportunity
and a dire threat to the Iraqi government, now under the control of Saddam
Hussein. On the one hand, Iran was in disarray. The various elements in the
coalition that overthrew the shah were badly divided and the army was being
purged. Further, the taking of American hostages in November 1979, combined with
the desire of the new government to free the country from all foreign influence,
left Iran internationally isolated. Never had Iraq’s rival been so
vulnerable.
On the other hand, Iranian Shia Muslims had
carried out the successful revolution against the shah’s secular government.
Their success excited many Iraqi Shias with the possibility of similar gains in
their country. Although Shiaes also constitute the majority of Muslims in Iraq,
the Sunnis (Sunni Islam) had long held political power in Iraq’s secular
government. Cautiously, the domestic opposition to Hussein’s strong-handed
government became emboldened. One Iraqi religious leader in particular, Muhammad
Baqir al-Sadr, emerged with ideas very similar to Khomeini’s. Al-Sadr was soon
arrested and executed, bringing protests from some Iraqi Shias as well as a
crisis in Iranian-Iraqi relations.
While these events were unfolding, some
Iranian officials made no secret of their desire to have other Muslim countries
follow their path of Islamic revolution. A crisis between Iran and Iraq
escalated during 1980 as the two countries accused each other of border
violations and interfering in each other’s internal affairs. Iraq responded to
the escalation by repudiating the 1975 agreement giving Iran access to the Shatt
al Arab. On September 22, Iraq further escalated the conflict, launching the
full-scale invasion of Iran that initiated eight years of warfare.
IV | INVASION AND COUNTERATTACK |
Iraqi troops invaded Iran along a front some
500 km (300 mi) long. Numerous and well-equipped Iraqi forces overwhelmed the
small Iranian border units and advanced into southwestern Iran. With the far
side of the Shatt al Arab thus secured, Iraq captured the southern border city
of Khorramshahr in the oil-rich Khūzestān province and began besieging other
towns along the frontier. However, the Iranian resistance was stiffer than Iraq
expected. Using its superior naval power, Iran quickly mounted an effective sea
blockade. Standing up to Iraq’s larger air force, the Iranian air force issued
retaliatory raids that checked Iraq’s advance on the ground. In January 1981
Iran launched its first counteroffensive, but Iraq decimated the assault. The
war entered a protracted stalemate.
The stalemate did little to encourage either
country to engage in diplomatic dialogue. The Iraqi government accused Iran of
being bent on regional domination, while the Iranian government called for
revolution in Iraq. Briefly in 1981 Iraq stopped fighting and expressed some
willingness to consider a cease-fire, but Iran rejected any attempt to stop the
war while Iraq occupied Iranian territory. Thereafter, the Iranian leadership
staked out a very firm diplomatic position, claiming that it would never accept
negotiations with the Iraqi government.
As the stalemate continued, Iran was able to
mobilize irregular forces (groups not normally part of the army but drafted and
armed in response to a crisis), including the Revolutionary Guard, an
ill-trained but dedicated core of fighters. By early 1982, the struggle for
political power in postrevolutionary Iran was resolved, allowing the government
to pursue a more coherent war policy. Iran seized the initiative with several
offensives that pushed Iraq out of much of Iran and brought the fighting into
Iraqi territory. Throughout the summer and fall of 1982, Iranian attacks along
the border focused on splitting the south of Iraq, where the majority of the
Shias lived, from the north and capturing the southern Iraqi city of Al
Başrah.
The Iranian offensives of 1982 set a pattern
that continued for the rest of the war. Exploiting their superiority in numbers,
Iran sent its Revolutionary Guard on the attack, supported by regular military
forces. Outnumbered Iraqi forces inflicted heavy losses on the Iranians but
ultimately fell back. As soon as the initial Iranian thrust had exhausted
itself, however, the Iraqi army exploited Iranian disorganization and lack of
equipment to retake much of the lost territory.
As the war continued, Iraq’s defense grew
increasingly desperate. Probably as early as 1983 the armed forces used poison
gas against Iranian troops. Iraq also widened the war to civilian targets,
launching missiles against Iranian cities, bombing Iranian oil installations,
and attacking Iranian shipping in the Persian Gulf. Iran responded with attacks
against civilian and economic targets in Iraq.
V | DIPLOMACY AND INTERNATIONAL INVOLVEMENT |
The diplomatic situation mirrored the
battlefield. Iraq had initiated the war with the conviction that a weak and
isolated Iran would surrender and accept border modifications. The Iraqi
leadership undoubtedly hoped to constrain and perhaps even bring down the
Iranian revolutionary leadership. As the war progressed, however, Iraq scaled
down its aims drastically. While it continued its harsh criticism of the Iranian
leadership (and sometimes of the Iranian people) and supported dissident Iranian
groups, Iraq accepted the idea of a cease-fire and negotiations concerning the
border dispute.
The Iranian leadership probably perceived the
Iraqi diplomatic retreat as a sign of further weakness. After evicting Iraq from
most Iranian territory by 1982, Iran was reluctant to end the war until Iraq
acknowledged that, as instigator, it bore full responsibility for the war’s
disastrous consequences. Iran continuously rejected a cease-fire on terms that
Iraq could accept, demanding huge reparation payments and an end to Hussein’s
rule before it would stop fighting. These conditions effectively killed any hope
of a peaceful resolution.
International reaction to the Iran-Iraq War
was remarkably muted, at least at the outset. Although the United Nations
Security Council called for a cease-fire after a week of fighting and renewed
the call on later occasions, the initial call was made while Iraq occupied
Iranian territory. Moreover, the UN refused to come to Iran’s aid to repel the
Iraqi invasion. The Iranians thus interpreted the UN as subtly biased in favor
of Iraq. Outside the UN, other governments took few constructive steps to end
the fighting—which was unusual for a war of such proportions. The international
silence was partly caused by Iran’s international isolation and the mutual
hostility between Iran and the West in the wake of Iran’s Islamic revolution.
Further, Iran did not actively seek international support, wanting to remain
free of relationships that might make it beholden to other nations. Iraq,
expecting an easy victory against a vulnerable opponent, also did not seek
international support in the early stages of the war.
Only within the Middle East did either side
seek to win diplomatic support. Most Arab states regarded Iraq warily but were
even more frightened by the prospect of a victory by the revolutionary Iranian
regime. Slowly at first, then more quickly after 1982, most Arab
states—especially Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the other states of the
Arabian Peninsula—aided Iraq militarily and diplomatically. Iran had few friends
in the region: Syria, a longtime rival of Iraq, stood out in the Arab world for
its support of Iran, and at times Libya offered its support.
As the war wore on and Iraq failed to persuade
Iran to accept a cease-fire, Iraq sought increasingly to internationalize the
conflict. It first made clear that it would accept international mediation,
casting pressure on Iran to do the same. Iraq also attacked Iranian shipping;
this brought Iranian reprisals against not only Iraqi shipping but also the
shipping of Iraq's backers (such as Kuwait). Western powers, including the
United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), were
eventually drawn to the Persian Gulf to protect the valuable shipments of oil
from the Middle East.
The prolonged fighting forced both sides to
search desperately for military equipment, even if it meant dealing with former
enemies. At the start of the war, Iraq had no diplomatic relations with the
United States due to its friendly relations with the USSR and its longstanding
conflict with Israel, the main U.S. ally in the Middle East. As the war
continued, however, Iraq toned down its rhetoric to gain American support. The
United States responded by giving trade credits to Iraq and supplying the Iraqi
armed forces with intelligence information through Saudi Arabia. Equally
important, the United States dropped objections to efforts by its allies,
especially France, to give weapons and other supplies to Iraq. The United States
was motivated in part by a desire to back its friends in the region (most of
whom supported Iraq), and in part by its fear of the broader consequences of an
Iranian victory. Iraq also relied heavily on the USSR for military
supplies.
Iran was also willing to accept support from
its former enemies. Since Iran’s military had been built under the rule of the
pro-American shah, most of its equipment was of American origin. So while the
new revolutionary government was hostile to both the United States and Israel,
it needed American spare parts. Israel could supply some of these and chose to
do so early in the war. Israel was anxious to undercut Iraq, a potential Arab
adversary. Equally remarkable, the United States government opened a secret
channel for selling arms to Iran in 1985, even as it urged other governments to
stop all military sales to the country (see Iran-Contra Affair). American
motives seemed designed partly to induce pro-Iranian groups in Lebanon to
release Americans held captive there, and partly to improve relations with Iran.
Profits from the arms sales were channeled to right-wing guerrillas in
Nicaragua, known as contras, to supply arms for use against the leftist
Nicaraguan regime. The exposure of the secret policy in 1986 greatly embarrassed
the government of U.S. president Ronald Reagan.
VI | MOUNTING LOSSES |
As the war continued, Iraq, no longer
believing it could achieve the sweeping victory it had hoped for at the outset,
concentrated more and more on simply preventing an Iranian victory.
Nevertheless, by 1986 Iraq's condition grew increasingly desperate. Its ability
to hold its defensive positions was threatened by Iran’s willingness to suffer
enormous casualties. Iran sent massive numbers of older men, children, and
sometimes women as human “waves” against Iraq’s better-equipped forces. Although
thousands upon thousands of these poorly armed forces were slaughtered with each
assault, the Iranian government continued to send them to the front. With its
larger population, Iran seemed confident that it would ultimately prevail. Iraq
also mustered civilians not normally called on to fight, and by the mid-1980s
its population was severely strained.
In 1986 Iran captured the Iraqi gulf town of
Al Fāw. Iraq responded with more effective techniques—especially the use of
massive amounts of poison gas—to thwart Iran’s frontal assaults. Iraq also
stepped up its attacks on Iranian cities, oil installations, and shipping,
drawing severe Iranian reprisals against Iraqi oil production and shipping that
prompted more American activity in the gulf. Although clashes between American
and Iranian forces fell far short of full-scale battles, the American presence
nevertheless brought an end to Iranian superiority over Iraq at sea, giving Iraq
time to resupply its weaponry and stop the Iranian ground advance.
VII | CEASE-FIRE |
In 1987 Iran's leaders prepared for what
they hoped would be a last round of offensives to end the war and topple the
Iraqi government. As the situation became steadily graver, international concern
mounted. In July the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 598,
calling for both sides to stop fighting, withdraw to the prewar border, and
submit to an international body to determine responsibility for the war. Iraq
seized on the resolution, but Iran refused to end hostilities with victory so
near. Iran continued its attacks but did not achieve the victory for which it
had hoped.
By 1988 Iraq, sufficiently rearmed and
regrouped, drove the Iranians out of Al Fāw and several other border areas. Iran
was in no position to launch a counterattack, and the international situation
seemed increasingly favorable to Iraq. Many Iranian leaders concluded that the
war could not be won and worked to persuade Khomeini to accept Resolution 598.
Although the resolution failed to provide key Iranian aims—such as an end to
Hussein’s government, payment of reparations, or clear identification of Iraq as
the initiator of the war—Khomeini endorsed the cease-fire in July. On August 20,
1988, both sides ceased fighting in accordance with the terms of Resolution
598.
VIII | CONSEQUENCES AND AFTERMATH |
The Iran-Iraq War lasted just short of
eight years and resulted in catastrophic destruction in both countries. Because
both Iran and Iraq used irregular military units, attacked civilian populations,
and played down their own losses while playing up those of their opponents,
reliable casualty figures do not exist. For example, Iran claimed to have lost
200,000 or fewer of its own citizens, while Iraq claimed to have killed 800,000
Iranians. Neutral estimates come closer to the Iranian claim but are uncertain.
Because of different battlefield techniques, Iraq’s deaths were probably about
half those suffered by Iran. The total number of people killed almost certainly
exceeds 300,000. Wounded and captured soldiers push the casualty total over one
million, and some estimates of total casualties exceed two million.
The war was also extremely destructive to
each country’s economy. Estimates vary, but the war’s total cost, including
military supplies and civilian damages, probably exceeded $500 billion for each
side. Both Iran and Iraq sacrificed their considerable oil wealth to the war for
nearly a decade, and Iraq was forced to borrow heavily, especially from its
allies on the Arabian Peninsula.
Remarkably, the war led to no tremendous
political change in either country. Despite having led his country into a
disastrous military conflict, Hussein emerged from the war more secure than
before; he even claimed the Iranian failure to unseat him represented a
tremendous Iraqi victory. The Iranian government could have ended the war in
1982 on only marginally different terms from those obtained six years later, yet
the ensuing years of fruitless struggle consolidated rather than undermined
Iranian popular support for the Islamic republic.
Internationally, the war resolved few
issues between the two countries. Although Resolution 598 called for both sides
to withdraw to the prewar border, release prisoners, and negotiate all
outstanding issues, these terms proved difficult to implement and negotiations
remained deadlocked for two years. In some ways the Iran-Iraq War contributed to
the outbreak of the Persian Gulf War in 1991: It left Iraq with a strong army
and large debts to Arab nations, including Kuwait. Iraq cited Kuwait’s refusal
to forgive Iraq’s war debt as one reason for invading its oil-rich neighbor.
Only when Iraq was forced into desperate straits during the Gulf War did it move
to repair its relationship with Iran. Iraq withdrew from Iranian territory,
agreed to restore the 1975 border, and engaged in a large-scale prisoner
exchange. Both sides charged the other with retaining some prisoners, however,
and the border demarcation remained incomplete. A decade after the 1988
cease-fire, Iran and Iraq had yet to settle these differences.
No comments:
Post a Comment