• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

UN and Iraq: The Weakest Coalition

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Mitchell Goulding Professor Solomon Major International Organizations 16 August 2007 UN and Iraq: The Weakest Coalition As the United Nations plans to reintroduce itself into the political landscape of Iraq, many realists argue that the United Nation's intervention, much like the intervention of the United States, will fail. While the United Nations argue that the multilateral approach they offer is what Iraq needs, they also submit that the United States will still shoulder much of the responsibility in Iraq. For this reason, Iraq will react with the same fervor at the UN's interference as they do to the United States': mass bombings and civilian casualties. While UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon argues that the organization of many foreign ministers to help initiate reform in Iraq will work, he also submits that the safety of his officials will remain "of paramount concern." The submission reveals the most important flaw in the United Nations' plan: Iraq has become overridden with violence ever since both the United States and the United Nations entered the war. In fact, following the United Nations announcement of intervention, the death toll of the "quadruple bombing in an area of mud and stone houses in the remote northern desert on Tuesday evening reached at least 250 dead" with "350 wounded making it the deadliest coordinated attack since the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003." ...read more.

Middle

Still, it remains impossible for the drastically different religious factions in Iraq to set aside their differences. Social constructivists' desire to teach them to tolerate the other fails because of each faction's congenital desire to supersede their competition. The United Nations and United States argue that quality of life has been improving in Iraq for both the Shi'as and the Sunnis; however, the reality lies in the concept of absolute vs. relative gains. While both parties have improved under the concept of absolute gains in regards to availability of services and in some aspects safety, once put into relative perspective, the gains become minimal if existent. To the Sunnis who were once dominant over the Shi'as in Iraqi politics, the rise of the Shi'as under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki represents a failure and regression into the lower tier of Iraqi societal hierarchy. In the relative position, the Sunnis are in a worse place now than they were preceding the invasion of America into Iraq. Now out of political power, the Sunnis face the same persecution the Shi'as faced under Sunni rule. Not only is the safety and personal interests of the Sunni party at threat, but also the Shi'as have replaced them as the most powerful religious group in the country, causing the relative gains of the Sunnis to actually be a deficit. ...read more.

Conclusion

Because of the United States' unique role as the primary actor in the United Nations, any non-partisan citizen can come to the conclusion that any UN intervention involving America will fail. Because America still remains the shoulder of this operation, all attempts at reconciliation and reformation of Iraq for true improvement fall short. To make a difference, the almighty United States must resign its role in Middle-Eastern politics, including its relationship with Iraq's enemy Israel. While the United States and the United Nations remain optimistic of their success under the liberal idea that the corruption and aggression in Iraq is all due to misunderstanding and that cooperation can be met, realists meet the UN's decision to participate in Iraq again as fruitless and laughable. No matter how much money and supplies the United Nations -meaning the United States-pumps into Iraq, the situation will remain the same: internal strife and conflict will continue until separate countries are formed. The United States must let go of the idea of success in Iraq as many Americans have already abandoned the concept in favor of focusing the wasted funds on security domestically and social issues such as immigration, education, and healthcare. As liberals and the United States continue to promote their pending success in Iraq, realists should begin looking for alternative methods of supporting United States security and national interest in other regions. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Middle east section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Middle east essays

  1. Free essay

    Why was the invasion of Iraq so controversial?

    Consequently a major split in international opinion was established by U.S.A. and U.K. with Spain at first for the invasion and Germany, France, Russia, China with Spain coming later were against it.

  2. Assess the effectiveness of the Arab and Israeli peace initiatives from the 1970s to ...

    Palestinians and Israeli would live in peace with secured borders. Facing elections in March 1997, Prime Minister Rabin he Muhammad Anwar al-Sadat, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt, and Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel, met with Jimmy Carter, President of the United States of America, at Camp David

  1. Israel and Iran

    For example "The Supreme Leader" of Iran trumps the president of Iran at any time. "The Supreme Leader" is responsible for the delineation and supervision of "the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran".

  2. Israel's Security Barrier

    line and finally the third route which is the middle "pragmatic" route, incorporating the settlement blocs presented at the Camp David summit in July 2000, that includes the major Israeli settlements and security positions adjacent to the "Green Line."4 Which route the Israelis will materialize is not yet decided and will probably involve the opinion of the United States.

  1. Can terrorism ever be a legitimate and effective means of pursuing political goals?

    For the purposes of this study the latter will be used as this allows us to examine different terrorist organizations in a more objective manner. Therefore 'legitimate' will be taken to mean anything complying with international law, also known as the 'Law of Nations'.

  2. Terrorism and the United States

    It has reached to an extent that most of us have now become immune to it. We hear about the hijacking of different airplanes, kidnapping of diplomatic officers, slaughter of innocent civilians. However, terrorists in most instances first strike by doing something vicious like bombing an area and bio-chemical attacks

  1. The role of International law in regards to The Palestinian Dilemma.

    The United Nations Organization, whether represented by the General Assembly, the Security Council or the International Court of Justice, has no legal competence to take away the sovereignty of any community over its land7. Ian Brownly explains in the book of Principle of Public International Law that the uncertain legal

  2. Nuclear proliferation in Iran

    Saddam Hussein was ousted in twenty one days time. This is a perfect reason for Iran to be concerned especially being that ideologically Iran and the West bump heads. Regionally it is important to point out that in the Iran ? Iraq war there was little help from the internationally

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work