REVIEW: Bush administration's attacks of Afghanistan and Iraq
REVIEW: Bush administration's attacks of Afghanistan and Iraq

REVIEW: Bush Administration’s Attacks of Afghanistan and Iraq

Agenda of the neo-cons and it’s effect of the Bush administrations handling both the 9/11 attacks its aftermath and particularly the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Agenda of the neo-cons and it’s effect of the Bush administrations handling both the 9/11 attacks its aftermath and particularly the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

The actions and effects of neo-cons and the Bush administration's handling of both the September 11 attacks and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in particular.

Article Download “PDF”

Research by Sinem MANAV

The ideology we call neoconservatism is the new foreign policy adopted by the USA to legitimize the Great Middle East Project. Bush Doctrine also formed around neoconservatism. The sole purpose of Bush and his government is to shape this around politics and doctrine to legitimize the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. It is possible that we can define this foreign policy adopted by the United States as Jewish-Israeli origin and anti-Muslim, but since it cannot discredit it by expressing it in this way, it is legitimate to explain it with neoconservatism and the Bush Doctrine that develops accordingly (Tomsen, Peter).

The September 11 Events

The September 11 incident was a very important beginning in terms of changing the political balances in the Middle East. 9/11 To discuss the occupation of Iraq and the invasion of Afghanistan and its subsequent effects, we need to know at least about Iran as well as the United States because Iran wants to partner with the Middle East project from its perspective, as it has the neighboring country and the Shiite sect. It is not surprising that it is sometimes on the side of the partner and sometimes on the enemy side.

The US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11 made Iran’s active foreign policy be seen more clearly (Moore, 2014). The connections that Iran has established with other Shiite groups in the region and the expansion of its sphere of influence as a result of these connections have brought to the agenda the “Shiite Crescent” discourse about the region where the Middle Eastern Shiites are located.

The Foreign Policy of the Bush

The Middle East and America’s plan has been very confused with the neoconservatism and not taking into account the countries around Iraq, especially Iran, which could be rivals to the Great Middle East Project that shaped the foreign policy of the Bush administration. With the weakening of central government in countries such as Iraq and Lebanon in recent years, the cooperation of ethnic and sectarian groups in these countries with countries other than their own has increased based on identity (Salihi, E).

This process accelerated with the September 11 events. The September 11 incident significantly affected the foreign policy of the USA and the new balances in the Middle East. The change of balances is based on the foreign policy of the USA, which is one of the important actors that shape the international system, and the internal dynamics of the Middle East.

The Bush Doctrine

Post-2001 US foreign policy, known as the Bush Doctrine, contains two important elements. The first of these is the preventive intervention understanding and the other is the temporary support policy for democratic administrations in the Middle East instead of authoritarian regimes. The USA has also openly tested these policies on Iraq and Afghanistan. This change in the foreign policy of the USA has led to the formation of new balances in the region (Tomsen, P).

According to the preventive intervention understanding, the USA should intervene in advance to the states that may pose a threat to it. As a result of this policy, the USA intervened in Afghanistan and Iraq (Zakheim, D). While the power vacuum in Afghanistan and Iraq widened Iran’s sphere of influence, the US’s aggressive policies increased Iran’s threat perceptions. For this reason, Iran-centered new balances were affecting the political dynamics in the Middle East during this period. The Bush doctrine, along with discourses such as the Greater Middle East Project, included the understanding of democratizing the Middle East and integrating the Middle Eastern countries with the international system produced by the West (Zakheim, D).

This process accelerated with the September 11 events. The September 11 incident significantly affected the foreign policy of the USA and the new balances in the Middle East. The change of balances is based on the foreign policy of the USA, which is one of the important actors that shape the international system, and the internal dynamics of the Middle East.

Post-2001 US foreign policy, known as the Bush Doctrine, contains two important elements. The first of these is the preventive intervention understanding and the other is the temporary support policy for democratic administrations in the Middle East instead of authoritarian regimes. The USA has also openly tested these policies on Iraq and Afghanistan. This change in the foreign policy of the USA has led to the formation of new balances in the region (Tomsen, P).

One of the most talked-about issues with democratization was the position of minorities in Middle Eastern countries. Especially the possibility of Shiite minority groups in the Gulf countries to express themselves and how their relations with Tehran will affect the political dynamics in the region were among the most discussed issues. The US did not insist on democratization rhetoric after a while, with the fear that Iran would expand its sphere of influence.

Invade of Afghanistan and Iraq

Based on all of these, the reasons that America presented to invade Afghanistan and Iraq were too simple to satisfy even the world public opinion seemed very funny. Even in the Western media, it has been said that it occupied it under the pretext of hosting nuclear weapons, terrorism, and exporting democracy because Iraq in particular ceased to harbor nuclear weapons long years ago. The world paid the invasion bill of Bush, who tried the Bush Doctrine, namely the preventive policies that he adopted in his new foreign policy and temporary support policies for the democratic administrations in the Middle East, in both countries.

Perhaps, relying on the understanding of the economy shaped by the reagoneconmics policies of Donald Reagon, who was the former president during the period when he was in charge of the administration, he confronted the invasion of Iraq with an irreversible economic debt that would bring the world face to the 2008 crisis. (Greenspan, Alan). To cope with the 2008 crisis, the USA created a credit bubble by giving households with low credit ratings (bad loans) that they cannot pay.

Globalization Economic Depression

We can also call it Subprime Mortgage. The same event happened during the 1929 Great Depression, which is why the 2008 crisis is also described as the 2nd Great Depression. We can simply give an example of the effects of globalization on the industrial process and trade balance brought about by liberal policies. Neoliberalization is the continuation of globalization and state intervention knocking on the door from time to time.

The war economy developed after the Iraqi invasion led to an increase in the money supply, that is, an expansionary monetary policy was implemented because financing of the payments was important for both the defense ministry and the pentagon to be budgeted in the congress and approved in the Senate, in addition to this, the domestic market had to continue sustainably without problems, as well as domestic borrowing and domestic borrowing.

The formation of a balance of payments between external borrowing was essential at this point. Whistle interest rates and booming circulation were progressing in a way to increase inflation subprime- mortgage loans increased people’s investment in fixed assets (real estate). his intervention was quick. To summarize in general terms, the US economy has always grown after the Breton Woods collapse, that is, it does not affect the policies of the presidents much, it proceeds for the same purpose, there is only a difference in method.

The debts given to countries with low credit ratings did not affect the crisis, it was a very, very small part of the crisis. The IMF was making the stand-by arrangement under the guidance of the USA, but the USA resorted to it after World War II. but the real thing happened then, and the global crisis broke out.

As a result, it is not coincidental that Bush continues to read the storybook “my little goat” when he finds out that the 1st building was blown up while going to a kindergarten in Florida during the 9/11 attacks, but did not return from the road. When he realized that he could not invade Iraq and indirectly on the pretext that it harbored al-Qaeda, Bush invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq around his doctrine and continued to realize his great Middle East project by violating even international law. However, it is very wrong that it could cost the whole world the economic burden during all these occupations. It is obvious that America has the largest economy in the world and almost every state will be affected by it (Roubini, Nouriel).

Research by Sinem MANAV