Fifth Session of the General Assembly
Agenda Item One: 2003 Iraq - American Coalition War
UNGA Historic Scenario - 2003 Iraq War
It’s 2003 and the Coalition of the willing led by the United States of America have just declared war on Iraq and Saddam Hussein’s government. They claim that Saddam possesses weapons of mass destruction and that the government was an immediate threat to the USA and its coalition allies. Secondary reasons that Saddam was funding and supporting Al Qaeda have also been raised by some members of the coalition as well as some simply arguing that it is justified as they are toppling a repressive dictatorship and brining democracy to Iraq. The Declaration of war has been met with international outrage from both the international community and the United Nations itself which did not authorise military action of any kind. The Secretary General Kofi Annan has described the war as illegal and in breach of the UN charter.
The legitimacy of the war can be focused on whether its 3 justifications (WMD’s, Al Qaeda funding & Illegitimacy of Dictatorship) are just and fair reasons for war. The US has defended its claim of WMD’s in Iraq with evidence from a Pentagon unit, the Office of Special Plans, which had allegedly found evidence of such devices. The unit has however been criticised as fabricating data and doing whatever was necessary to prove what the Bush administration wanted to be true. In addition the UN sent weapon inspectors into Iraq earlier in the year who were given full cooperation from the Iraqi forces. Iraq was then required to provide a full declaration of its current weapons capabilities and manufacturing which the UNSC found to be incomplete making Iraq in breach of its international obligations legitimising the war. The CIA have also pointed to a source in the Iraqi government who had suggested that Saddam was hiding poison gas among Sunni tribesman and had ambitions for a nuclear program though it was not yet active. German intelligence has also found evidence from an Iraqi defector that Iraq had active biological weapons programs, this would be a breach of international law.
After the war was declared however a number of European journalists have published Iraq’s full declaration submitted to the Security Council with 8000 additional pages including information
information on US and European companies and government agencies that had historically assisted Iraq in developing its chemical and biological weapons capabilities. In addition shortly before the invasion Hans Blix, the lead weapons inspector to Iraq, advised the UN Security Council that Iraq was cooperating with inspections and that the confirmation of disarmament through inspections could be achieved quickly if Iraq remained cooperative. It is also notable that a proposed resolution authorising military action in Iraq and submitted by the US, UK and Spain was withdrawn from the UNSC when it became clear that several permanent members of the council would use their veto power against it making it far more difficult to justify the invasion.
Opposition to the war has already become notable with the French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin declaring that ‘military intervention would be the worst solution’ and anti-war groups organising public protests across the world. Hans Blix has continued to state that no evidence of proscribed activities have been found in Iraq and that any would have been found if they had been allowed to stay instead of being ‘advised’ to leave Baghdad by the US. Kofi Annan has declared the war as not in line with the UN charter.
It is now the 1st April about two weeks after the war began and the coalition is clearly winning the war. The General Assembly meets to re-examine the war and determine whether it is deemed legal and, if it is illegal, to determine how the coalition should be punished, if they should at all, and how Iraq should be dealt with in whatever state it is in.
No resolution was drafted for this scenario