This isn’t really an EILI5 question, as the answers so far demonstrate. More, your question assumes a major point of contention, that much of the Middle East wasn’t already very unstable.
Was neighbouring Iran destabilized by the invasion? No. Was neighbouring Turkey, a long-time NATO member, destabilized? No.
Was neighbouring Saudi Arabia destabilized? No. Was neighbouring Kuwait destabilized? No.
Who did have trouble? Syria, a country which was already on shaky ground and yet somehow the same leader, Pres. Bashar al-Assad, remains in power there now.
The later Arab Spring which started in Tunisia had nothing to do with Iraq, and a lot to do with Ben Ali an aging leader of a heavy-handed dictatorship overdue for overthrow. Similarly, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak was an aging dictator who had alienated his military supporters by grooming his son to replace him.
None of this means that what Bush and Rumsfeld did to Iraq was not criminally irresponsible. Just that instability in the Middle East was not simply caused by the US’s disastrous and illegal decision to invade Iraq. The US ended up making both Iran and Saudi Arabia much stronger than they had been, but did not achieve any stated policy goals. It did make some contractors very rich though.
Latest Answers