With the current upheaval in the Levant due to the instability of the Syrian Arab Republic and the Republic of Iraq, due equally to the the current Syrian civil war and the prevalence of ISIS in Syria. In the region, modern events must be put into perspective by placing them in the context of the legacy of the Iraq War to achieve a better understanding of the interactions of the present with the legacy of the past. The Iraq War proved to be a flashpoint in the region, contributing to what is now a predicted long-term instability in Iraq proper, which in turn served as an incubator for radical organizing. Islamic state that not only threatens war. torn Syria, but also the region as a whole, from Turkey to Libya, as it gathers more and more supporters. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essayNot only did the war affect the region itself, but also the way foreign powers interacted politically with its constituents. The bitterly fought war in Iraq still leaves a bad taste in the mouths of local powers, both intellectually and militarily, forcing the international powers in place to show levity. As a result, in the wake of the Iraq War, the Obama administration in the United States, as well as the country's allies abroad, faced strong pressure to move away from a "hands-on" approach. ground” in military intervention in the Middle East, preferring the use of “air power,” no-fly zones over airstrikes, to influence and shape the region politically. The outbreak of the war that was one of the biggest political influences of the first part of the 21st century in the Levant is a highly controversial issue, largely driven by a US intelligence assertion that weapons of mass destruction, or WMD , in Iraq would be hidden by the Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. Invaded in 2003 by a coalition of international forces dominated by the United States, the Iraq War quickly turned into a war that U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld feared would turn into "a long and hard work” in a memorandum sent to senior officials before the invasion. (Loyola). As progress stalled due to civil strife between the country's major factions following the invasion phase of the Iraq War, an alternative was needed to end the violence of the war and transfer power to a government Iraqi. stable enough to maintain and defend itself against threats from Baathist Iran from outside the country and radical Shiite militant groups within the country. The Surge, a radically changed policy implemented by the Bush administration and its allies in 2007, became known for providing this desperately needed alternative and turned into one of the most successful military campaigns of the era modern, reversing the high tide of civil unrest and violence that erupted a year earlier, in 2006 (Flynn). The pipe dream of an international coalition stuck in the Iraqi desert, an influx of troops and ideas, as General Petraeus put it, seemed to be exactly the opposite of what was needed. to end an already long and slowly evolving conflict (Pryer). In his article, “How to Reverse a Failed Policy,” in The National Interest, Dr. Ray Takeyh explains how politics has shaped the country, writing: “Iraq's future remains uncertain. However,there is no doubt that a change in strategy saved the American enterprise and prevented Iraq from collapsing further into a horrific civil conflict, with America caught in the conflagration (Takeyh). In highlighting the benefits of the Surge in the international campaign in the country, it is also worth noting that its end result was a complete withdrawal of foreign troops from the new Republic of Iraq in December 2011, leading to a lower level of stability within the country. nation, and contributing to the conditions that now allow the Islamic State to militarily control parts of the country. “The most important legacy of Iraq is that the U.S. military cannot shape outcomes (Landler). » Following an international withdrawal from Iraq, due in part to disenfranchisement following a war deemed "mission accomplished" years earlier, popular opinions among the major military powers influencing the region were unanimous on the fact that they did not want a new commitment from the international community. troops. A popular belief among these powers was that even with such a commitment, little progress would be made, a sentiment expressed in Landler's article published in the New York Times days after the final American withdrawal from Iraq. With the withdrawal coinciding with the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings and little public support for military intervention, the United States assumed the role of spectator rather than major player, always feeling the pain of a pair long, drawn-out wars in the Middle East. (Tharoor). Observing from afar and offering little support to their democratic compatriots, the international community also failed to intervene directly in the uprisings, leading to serious instability in newly democratic Iraq and Libya, as well as in Syria, where the UN condemned President al-Assad still remains in power (Tharoor). Already indebted countries, from the United States to Italy to the EU as a whole, were unwilling to spend resources, even on causes they had strongly supported in the case of the Spring uprisings Arab, due to popular opinion already marked by the war in Iraq. This led to the failure of many nascent populist uprisings, without the aid of any organized military unit, particularly in Egypt where, even today, de facto military rule is in force ("Egypt"). By scarring the international community during the Iraq War and encouraging nations not to intervene directly, the conflict in the Iraqi desert as a whole contributed in large part to the instability we see in the Middle East today. East. After ground military intervention following the Iraq War, countries outside the region sought other ways to advance their interests in the Middle East. Coinciding with the rise of drone technology in the United States, the result was a clear solution to a problem that had plagued politicians who ran for office on a more pacifist platform, while remaining involved abroad. As the Toronto Star reported in 2012, “a majority of war-weary Americans, however, continue to support drone strikes, with 62% in favor and 28% against, according to [the Pew Research Center]. They may be exceptions on the issue, but the obvious advantages from the American perspective – the targeted elimination of potential threats without risking American soldiers – remain a politically winning formula (Potter).” The result has been growing confidence in what Keith L Shimko, PhD, calls “air power.” In his book The Iraq Wars and America's Military Revolution, Dr. Shimko describes this..