ipl-logo

Examples Of Neoconservatism In Iraq

872 Words4 Pages

Introduction For the last thirty years, the Middle East has been a hotspot for armed conflict and political unrest. In fact, the region has witnessed regimes that have collapsed by foreign intervention and others overthrown by their own people. The invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 were the most controversial of these events as their legality has been questioned and the fact that the reasoning behind the war has been based on inaccurate intelligence and a non-existing threat. Despite the fact that the war itself was a brief affair, Iraq quickly fell into a military insurgency, political disorder, and uncertainty of what the future holds (MacMillan, 2005, p. 1). In this paper, I argue that neoconservatism was the driving force behind …show more content…

For neoconservatives, a peaceful and orderly world is one which depends on “American omnipotence and leadership” (Schmidt & Williams, 2008, p. 195). In other words, when the international order is at risk, American hegemony is the only reliable defense and American power would be beneficial for the United States as well as the world. (Schmidt & Williams, 2008, p. 195). Also, in comparison with the concept of the balance of power, neoconservatives consider American hegemony as superior in maintaining and achieving American national interests (Schmidt & Williams, 2008, p. 196). More importantly, neoconservatives see the unipolar world after the collapse of the Soviet Union as a perfect period in international relations for the United States and that a return to a multipolar world with a balance of power will be a threat to American security and interests (Schmidt & Williams, 2008, p. 196). According to John Mearsheimer, an American political scientist, the key to understanding the importance of American hegemony and an unparalleled military strength for neoconservatives is the fact that they “believe that international politics operate according to bandwagoning logic” (2005). In fact, neoconservatives think that through “big stick” diplomacy, weaker countries will join the United States’ “bandwagon” when it is threatening or attacking its enemies and the fact that other countries will not get in the path of the United States’ interests (Mearsheimer,

Open Document