“Jus ad bellum” is Latin for the “right to war.” There were many significant and varied perspectives about the United States’ “right to war” in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Several groups of people agreed with the pending start of the Iraq war, while many others opposed the imminent invasion. These groups of people strongly demonstrated their standings on the issue. France and Germany, known allies of the United States, were outwardly opposed to the invasion. Other countries, such as England supported the United States in its plan to invade. Next, civilians around the world showed their disagreement with the potential invasion while others showed their agreement with the invasion. The key assumption driving those who favored the war was that there was the ‘imminent threat’ of weapons of mass destruction. Additionally, the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) organizations conducted mass searches for Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) in Iraq. These searches came up with no viable evidence that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction. However, contradicting beliefs and skeptics like Tony Blair and President Bush himself believed that Iraq had WMD, and that Iraq was simply hiding them from the inspectors. Although some may argue that the United States was not justified in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, others argue they were justified, and this can be seen through the perspectives of various groups involved in the conflict. The leaders of France and Germany argued that the U.S. did not have enough evidence to support that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction; however, the leaders of England sided with the U.S. in their decision to invade without further investigation. On March 10, 2003, when asked about France’s position on the UN resolution, President Jacques Chirac of France said, “Regardless of the circumstances, France will vote no. France sees nothing at the moment to justify war to disarm Iraq.” (BBC) On March 18, 2003 on french television, Chirac publicly said, "Iraq today does not represent an immediate threat that justifies an immediate war." (New York Times) According to UNMOVIC, the United States would have needed more evidence that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction in order to declare war. Also, to his Social Democratic Party, German Chancellor, General Schröder, said, "Don 't expect Germany to approve a resolution legitimizing war," (BBC) which depicts his disagreement with the situation. Contrary to Germany and France’s arguments was England’s standing on the situation. In English Prime Minister, Tony Blair’s speech to Congress on July 17, 2003, he said, “Can we be sure that terrorism and weapons of mass destruction will join together?..If we are wrong, we will have destroyed a threat that at its least is responsible for inhuman carnage and suffering. That is something I am confident history will forgive.” (CNN) Blair believed that it was necessary to invade Iraq; even if not every country was as convinced as he was that Hussein had WMD. He says that even if Hussein did not have WMD, going to Iraq to fight would still have been worthwhile. In the end, the U.S. went forward with the invasion without the further inspection. France and Germany were opposed to how audacious the United States was in going to war instead of ensuring that their allegations were correct; however, England backed the U.S. and
…show more content…
Some of America’s allies, like Germany and France, refused to be involved, or to help the United States in the invasion. However, other allies, like England, supported America in their invasion. Though many people throughout the world were opposed to the invasion and protested for peace, there were also many people who agreed with the invasion. Also, even though the UNMOVIC and IAEA organizations, who conducted searches for WMD in Iraq, came back with no evidence of said weapons, people were still in fear that Hussein was hiding WMD. Some groups believed that the United States was not justified in the initiation of the Iraq war but some believe that The United States was justified; opinions were split in determining if there was “jus ad bellum” before the 2003 invasion of
Some of America’s allies, like Germany and France, refused to be involved, or to help the United States in the invasion. However, other allies, like England, supported America in their invasion. Though many people throughout the world were opposed to the invasion and protested for peace, there were also many people who agreed with the invasion. Also, even though the UNMOVIC and IAEA organizations, who conducted searches for WMD in Iraq, came back with no evidence of said weapons, people were still in fear that Hussein was hiding WMD. Some groups believed that the United States was not justified in the initiation of the Iraq war but some believe that The United States was justified; opinions were split in determining if there was “jus ad bellum” before the 2003 invasion of