The narrative of violence in the Middle East:
• It is important to note that the narrative that Saddam tortured because of a long history of torture in the region is false. He was taught how to torture in detail by foreign actors as discussed in the many articles. Furthermore, the question is not about needing international agreements, it is about highlighting Saddam's crimes over many others' because it was convenient for the others to rally together and create a narrative that suited their interests.
• Additionally, the narrative that Saddam tortured because of a long history of torture in the region is false. He was taught how to torture in detail by foreign entities with their own special interests. The real question is not about needing international agreements, but rather about highlighting Saddam's crimes over many others' because it was convenient for the others to rally together and create a narrative. This narrative was used to justify foreign intervention and exploitation of resources in the region.
• It is also important to note that the narrative of violence and oppression in the Middle East is a recent one. The narrative began in the 1900s when geological exploration for oil based on mapping of tectonic plates that indicate the presence of oil became necessary for many countries who were facing post-war recessions. This exploration was facilitated by secretive contracts and neocolonial exploitation of resources. This narrative was used to justify foreign intervention and exploitation of resources in the region.
The role of the global North, South, East, and West in enabling violence in Iraq:
• It is important to understand that the involvement of all actors, including those from the global North and South, East and West, played a role in shaping the course of these conflicts.
• In the 1970s and 1980s, the United States and other Western powers, as well as developing countries such as India, Brazil, and Egypt, provided military and economic aid to Saddam Hussein's regime, with the goal of countering the influence of pro-communist governments in the region. However, this support had unintended consequences, as Saddam Hussein's regime became increasingly repressive and brutal, culminating in the use of chemical weapons against Kurdish civilians in 1988. Despite these actions, Iraq continued to receive support from a number of countries, including the Soviet Union, until the 1990 invasion of Kuwait.
• This is further exemplified by the role of various countries in funding weapons to Iraq before and after Saddam Hussein took power. The US, USSR, France, Syria, Iran, Germany, and other countries, including developing countries like India, Brazil, and Egypt, all played a part in supplying chemical weapons to Saddam's regime. This further highlights the complexity of the situation and the fact that there were no "good guys" in this situation. All sides were motivated by their own self-interests and profits, rather than the well-being of the people of Iraq.
• The incentive for countries such as Germany, France, and the United Kingdom to contribute to Iraq's chemical weapons program may have been driven by a combination of factors. One possible factor was economic gain. These countries had well-developed chemical industries and may have seen the sale of chemicals, equipment, and technology to Iraq as a business opportunity.
• Another factor could be the political and strategic considerations, at the time, Iraq was considered as a strong ally in the region, and some countries saw their support to the dictatorship as a way to keep Iraq on their side against Iran, which was perceived as a much greater threat to the stability of the region.
• In addition, during that period, there were no international laws or regulations that specifically prohibited the sale of chemicals or chemical weapon-related technology to Iraq. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) was only adopted in 1997, and it was only implemented in 2002. So, during the 80s and 90s, no legal frameworks were in place to prohibit or restrict the sale of these materials.
• For Developing countries, the incentive could be different, some of these countries may have been looking for economic and strategic gains by helping Iraq in its chemical weapons program, for instance, some countries may have wanted to gain access to Iraq's oil resources, or to have a good relationship with a powerful regime in the region, others may have had more ideological or ideological-related incentives.