11.4.2021

 In today's class, we discussed the issues on COP26 and the historical background behind the Iraqi war. Both Iraq and Saudi Arabia were supported by the western allies but the result of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait after Kuwait violated Iraqi property for oil led to the collusion between Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. This collusion included plummeting oil prices of Iraq after the war to prevent the country from rebuilding.  However, this made Saudi Arabia and Iraq turn backs on each other, which America was in the uncomfortable situation to choose which to side on. Inevitably, they sided on the richer and obviously profitably advantageous to America, Saudi Arabia. They imposed sanctions and froze the economy to kick Kuwait out of Iraq, and coerced Saddam Hussein. Moreover, after finding out that the dollars used to transact oil were being exchanged with euros, a rivalry of that time, breaching America into panic mode, and eventually the 2003 Iraq war. During the war after the Kuwait invasion, the opposing military to Iraq depleted Uranium dust, which is highly radioactive and cancerous. Roughly 500,000 people had passed away from the dust and the inability to build infrastructure was costly to the Iraqi people. And currently, OPEC is raising higher prices for lesser oil. 

It was quite shocking to see how the Iraqi war was driven solely by the decisions made by America and such western countries. Seeing how the war was developed in inhumane directions such as the ludicrous use of Uranium, and the unbelievable sanctions on pencils that hindered the education of youth in Iraq were astonishing. Imagine being told by your teacher that you are not allowed to use pencils because they include lead, a material crucial for creating ammunition. I wouldn't believe it frankly, but I felt that this move revealed a lot about the extent that countries can take to cease economical and military power for their own good. If Saudi Arabia didn't have abundant supplies of oil, I would guess that America would side with Iraq. Nowadays, it seems as if powerful countries can gain control of resources without having their land physically attacked. They simply need to negotiate deals and utilize the UN as a liability to fund their missions, such as the 23 billion dollars of unused Iraqi money stashed in the UN only to be utilized by America to fund the war against Iraq. The problem is, countries are free to initiate warfare without the consent of the UN. In that case, I also was able to acknowledge the weaknesses of the UN, and especially the hierarchy present within; the founders of this organization and the rest. 

Finally, we talked about the reactions from outsiders, and how compared to European countries, Japan's poll on protestors against the war was humiliating. I agree that Japanese people and their need to conform with societal norms heavily affect their motivation to speak out loud. However, I also believe that the war was more issuing in the neighboring regions and those involved. As such, I felt that it was important to judge Japan's unwillingness from other examples as well. The Fridays for Future movement for example is present in the younger generation, and while probing for this topic I discovered an article of university students conducting a strike against the school in order to protest for more involvement to reduce carbon emissions. Even Greta Thunberg has condemned this year's COP26, calling it a failure, and scientists are beginning to worry that the quota of the Paris agreement will not hold. It seems like much more action is necessary in order for revolutionary changes to occur.