Main Page | See live article | Alphabetical index

Predicted effects of invading Iraq

The factual accuracy of this article is disputed: see talk:Predicted effects of invading Iraq

The neutrality of this article is disputed.

Predicted effects of invading Iraq are those predicted prior to the actual invasion, not those that actually happened, nor new effects alleged after the fact.

Prior to the invasion, global news sources reported the following possible, alleged, reputed or expected effects of the U.S. plan to invade Iraq. The interest was triggered by the American announcement that the plan would be executed in early 2003, "in weeks not months", as put by G. W. Bush. This was presumed to have either a strong positive or strong negative impact on world politics, depending on one's point of view and assumptions. This article presents a neutral list of the effects predicted by both supporters and detractors of the plan, prior to the event, as background to the main article on the Iraq crisis of 2003 - see its timeline for current events.

The predicted effects were often cited in United Nations actions regarding Iraq, popular opposition to war on Iraq and global protests against war on Iraq. As American popular opinion of war on Iraq has changed to reflect doubts about the outcomes of war, it forced the American government position on war on Iraq to change somewhat, and worldwide government positions on war on Iraq increasingly isolated the American push to war. In particular, the objections above caused significant rifts within the UK Labour Party, threatening a challenge to the leadership of Anthony Blair. Public relations plans for war on Iraq also changed to address dire predictions in the above. The U.S. plan to invade Iraq itself changed somewhat, with a decreased role for Turkey due to Kurdish concerns [1].

Table of contents
1 List of effects predicted by those favoring the plan
2 List of effects predicted by the opponents of the plan
3 See also

List of effects predicted by those favoring the plan

List of effects predicted by the opponents of the plan

Opponents of the plan claimed to seek some of these same outcomes by means other than war. They often argued that some of the problems the U.S. plan seeks to overcome, such as high oil prices, challenges to the United Nations' authority, UN sanctions against Iraq of twelve years' standing, and high tensions between France, China, Russia and the US (these being three of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council), were all a direct or indirect result of US policies that have been in effect from at least 1986 and especially since 1991. Changing some of these policies, including removing U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia (as Al Qaeda and more recently some Saudi officials have also demanded), ending or relaxing sanctions that have had no effect on Saddam Hussein's grip on power, and respecting both the authority and pace of the United Nations, they argued, was likely to lead to reduced tension. Attacking Iraq on a US timetable they claimed would lead to:

Ecological effects

Negative ecological effects were predicted

See also Arabian Desert and East Sahero-Arabian xeric shrublands

Increase of islamic activity

an increase in Islamist activity leading to

Instability in Iraq after a war

possibly including

Changes to the balance of power in the oil industry

due to

Diplomatic power shifts


political impact in UK

Domestic US political impacts

on the
destabilizing influence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due to increasing fear in other nations not known for political stability or sanity, including negative impacts of the use of technology and public support for technology-focused wars, esp.

See also