Persian Gulf War

The war was fought very fiercely for Just one year between 1990 and 1991. Its effects can soul be felt In today's society. The war had quite a large impact on history, particularly modern history. The outcome of the war arguably poisoned the minds of many people, crippling relationships between many groups; particularly between the West and the Middle East. Its whole entirety has left a major impact on the lives of many people and will continue to be looked at as a dark time for Middle Easterners and quite the opposite for Westerners.

It is often argued that the war was ultimately a fight for oil. Several sources do present their arguments in favor of this statement, and are successful in establishing a case where this statement is true. His real motive was probably to take control of the wealth possessed by Kuwait (Lowe 2005, up. 253). Referring to Sad Hussein, the author has stated that Sad Hussein's primary motive for the war was to take control of Kuwaiti wealth. Their wealth was their OLL Industry; an Industry that the world relied on heavily, particularly for countries In the Middle East and beyond.

Most people take the view that Hussein was short on finances following the Iran-Iraq neighboring countries; this had mostly gone to waste and Hussein would not pay it all back. Additionally, he believed that Kuwait was historically a part of Iraq. Had this been true, he would have already possessed Kuwait for a long time. Several reasons can be produced to support the claim. As Iraq was short on finances, they needed only to claim a nation that had a booming industry. They didn't need to take over a country that had larger powers, and both the superpowers at the time were neutral awards Iraq.

Order custom essay Persian Gulf War with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

These facts, along with the small size of Kuwait, were in due course the main characteristics for Hussein's motives. Moreover, it was the West who was also in strife when they realized what was at stake from the invasion of Kuwait. Lowe (2005, p. 253) argues that Iraq and the USA were previously on neutral terms, as USA had helped Iraq in their war with Iran. In contrast to this, USA was threatened by the invasion, as it left Saudi Arabia incredibly vulnerable. Saudi Arabia at the time (and still to this day) have possessed the largest oil industry and production for a long mime.

This fact left several Western nations vulnerable as well, as Iraq were very close to invading Saudi Arabia next and this threat was made very clear to the West. If Saudi Arabia were to be invaded, their oil industry would have been controlled by Iraq, and the supply to the West would have been cut. The overwhelming evidence suggests that the war was a fight for oil, and a fight to protect the wealth produced by the oil industry. A variety of viewpoints emerge from political conflict in Iraq, and other Middle Eastern nations.

Most people take the view that the poor decisions by politics within Iraq, particularly on the part of Hussein, led to the downfall of the overall position and reputation of the Middle East post-war. 'International politics of Middle East have long been volatile and unstable' (Cellophanes 1992, up. 10). Indeed, the politics within the Middle East have been volatile and unstable, and this has led to their national identity becoming weaker. There is evidence to support that there was conflict in national interests, religions and ethnic rivalries post World War Two.

These inflicts have led the people to take sides within their own country, and to oppose neighboring countries who they should call their 'brothers' or 'sisters'. The balances of interests have been made harder and harder to achieve and maintain, stemming from the poor decisions made by the leaders of each nation. Therefore, Iraq's downfall arose from Hussein's overconfidence and greed for power, ambition, wealth and reputation. There are many reasons in favor for both sides of the issue about economic impacts for Iraq, as well as the U. S.

The majority viewpoint is that Iraq was already suffering financially, and the war left them in an even worse position. The financial crisis in Iraq had reached breaking point by early 1990 and Sad Hussein was in a desperate position (Finland 2003, up. 14). It is established that his motive for the war was to gain money, but the war was decisively won by the opposing side, proceeding to the economic suffering of Iraq. Conversely, the U. S. Did not suffer nearly as much. Hancock (2006) argues 'The Gulf War being the least expensive of all American wars resulted in a cost of only $26. 92 per American citizen'.

Comparatively, citizens of U. S. Had suffered a low economic loss and this was loosely opposite to that of Iraqis and other Arab nations. It is unarguable that the Middle East suffered a lot more economically compared to U. S. A. According to many sources, the aftermath of the war has left its mark on many around the world, particularly Iraqis. Common far more in number, but left negativity with Iraq. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia (2012) argues that Kuwait and Iraq suffered enormous property damage. This fact presents an argument to support that the huge property damage offered to Iraq applied to quite the rest of the Middle East.

They had suffered huge casualties and property damage from the war, but this only created more anger for Iraq. Continued uneasiness and conflict between Iraq and coalition forces; primarily U. S. , led to Second Persian Gulf War (The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 2012). The second war was based off of Hussein's anger towards the West and ongoing conflict was inevitable from the outcome of the first war. For these reasons, it is established that the aftermath of the war had a major effect on Iraq and the Middle East.

Even the most superficial investigation of the war produces the major effects of the war on the Middle East. The weight of public opinion is relied on the fact that most Middle Easterners suffered from the outcome of the war. Kettle (n. D. ) argues 'Both Kuwait and Iraq... Would have to face a period of turbulence and instability... Both have had their political integrity and independence, as well as their economy and civilian structures, seriously undermined... '. The quote conveniently provides the long term effects of the two nations, but has also affected the whole of the Middle

East. It is argued that the Middle East has been seen by the West as a permanent battleground. The effects had on the Middle East have even been solely blamed on themselves. Authors Beverly Milton Edwards and Peter Handkerchief (2007, up. 97) collectively argue 'one recurring theme in academic discourses is that contemporary observers, especially governmental ones, should have anticipated the invasion'. The outcome and aftermath have proved the adversity that the Middle Easterners have had to face, and the way they have responded in the past.

As the same time, it is argued that this war has added to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The Persian Gulf War led to overall instability within the Middle East, and it is because of this that there have been effects on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Conclusively, the war had a more of an impact on societies within the Middle East. In conclusion, the First Gulf War has led to ongoing conflict between the Middle East and the West in modern history. The war caused political, social and economic conflict between the nations involved in the war.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer