Russo-Ukraine War - The Consequences of the Illegal War in Iraq

 Saddam Hussein's Project to De-Dollarize Oil 

Saddam Hussein, the former President of Iraq, embarked on a daring project to dedollarize oil sales in the early 2000s. This move challenged the dominance of the US dollar in global oil trade. However, this bold initiative clashed with the strategic interests of the United States, leading to a tense relationship and ultimately to the illegal invasion of Iraq under false pretences.

In 2000, Saddam announced his intentions to shift Iraq's oil sales from US dollars to euros. This move was a direct challenge to the longstanding practice of pricing oil in dollars, an arrangement that had been in place for decades. The plan involved converting Iraq's oil revenue accounts from US dollars to euros, aiming to decrease reliance on the US currency.

The US dollar's dominant role in oil trading was established through the petrodollar system. Under this arrangement, oil-producing countries agree to price and sell oil exclusively in US dollars, ensuring strong demand for the currency worldwide. This provides the US with significant economic advantages, such as reduced borrowing costs and enhanced global financial influence.

Saddam's dedollarization plan threatened to weaken the petrodollar system and erode the economic advantages the US enjoyed. If more oil-exporting countries followed suit, it could lead to reduced demand for the US dollar, and potentially undermine its status as the world's primary reserve currency. The invasion of Iraq never had anything to do with weapons of mass-destruction, that was a lie from the outset. 

The US-led invasion of Iraq resulted in a protracted conflict and marked the beginning of a turbulent era in the region. Saddam's bold move to dedollarize oil sales left a lasting impact on the global geopolitical landscape. Despite the invasion, other oil-exporting nations have since considered alternative currencies for oil trade, signalling a growing challenge to the petrodollar system and US economic hegemony. In 2011, Libyan leader Muammar Ghaddafi was brutally murdered and had his nation destroyed for daring to suggest the same thing. 

Putin's Response to the US Invasion of Iraq.

The US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a watershed moment in international relations, with global repercussions that resonated far beyond the Middle East. Vladimir Putin and the Russian government strongly opposed the US-led invasion of Iraq from its outset. Russia, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, expressed concerns over the lack of UN authorization for military action. Putin consistently advocated for diplomatic solutions, calling for peaceful means to address Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and promoting the continuation of UN inspections.

Putin's response reflected Russia's broader disapproval of unilateral military action by any country. He stressed the need for adherence to international law and the importance of multilateral approaches in resolving global crises. Russia's opposition to the Iraq war echoed its concerns about the implications of interventionism on sovereignty and stability in international relations.

Russia's response to the US invasion of Iraq was influenced by ongoing geopolitical rivalries between the two nations. The aftermath of the Cold War and the Great Depression had left Russia weakened, while the US pursued its foreign policy objectives as a superpower. The Iraq war broke the international world order and further heightened tensions in their relationship, it was a blatant demonstration of unipolar dominance as the cheerfully announced their new Orwellian ‘rules based order’.

Putin's emphasis on the importance of the United Nations' role in international affairs was not only tied to Iraq but also reflected a broader perspective on the role of international institutions. Russia advocated for strengthening the UN's capacity to resolve conflicts and act as a forum for diplomatic dialogue, rejecting the idea of bypassing the UN in addressing global issues.

Putin's Peter the Great Speech: A Call for National Revival and Global Relevance

In 2003, one month after the illegal invasion of Iraq, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a landmark speech in St. Petersburg, commemorating the 300th anniversary of the city's founding by Peter the Great. The "Peter the Great Speech" was not just an acknowledgment of historical significance but also a powerful call for Russia's national revival and its role in shaping a multipolar world. 

In his speech, President Putin paid homage to Peter the Great, a pivotal figure in Russia's history, known for his modernization efforts to transform the nation into a major European power. Putin underscored the importance of acknowledging Russia's historical continuity and the lessons that could be drawn from past accomplishments to inform the country's future trajectory.

Putin's address emphasized the significance of national unity and pride. He called for Russians to recognize their shared history, culture, and values, fostering a sense of patriotism that would underpin Russia's resurgence on the global stage. By invoking Peter the Great's visionary leadership, Putin sought to inspire a sense of national purpose among his compatriots.

Drawing parallels with Peter the Great's efforts to modernize Russia, President Putin outlined his vision for modernizing the country's economy, infrastructure, and technological capabilities. He stressed the need for sustained economic growth, increased investment in education, science, and innovation to propel Russia towards a more prosperous future.

The speech also resonated with international observers, as Putin outlined Russia's desire to reclaim its global relevance. He highlighted the country's unique geopolitical position as a bridge between Europe and Asia and advocated for a more assertive role in global affairs. The emphasis on Russia's geopolitical significance signalled a shift towards a more active and influential foreign policy.

Putin's "Peter the Great Speech" endorsed the concept of a multipolar world, challenging the unipolar dominance of the United States in global politics. He called for a balance of power and greater respect for the sovereignty of nations, advocating for a more diverse and inclusive international order.

Amid the aspirations for national revival, President Putin acknowledged the challenges faced by Russia. He spoke of the difficulties the country had encountered in its post-Soviet transition and underscored the resilience of the Russian people in overcoming adversities.

Building BRICS: A New Geopolitical Alliance Emerges

The US-led invasion of Iraq inspired the greatest ever peaceful protest in history and was met with significant opposition from various countries worldwide. The legitimacy and legality of the intervention was questioned by almost everybody who knew that Saddam had nothing to do with the narratives pushed about 9/11 and WMD’s. The absence of UN Security Council approval and the intelligence failures regarding Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction led many countries to view the invasion as a prime example of US unilateralism.

The Iraq War raised concerns among emerging economies about the potential implications of US military interventions on global stability and security. The war highlighted the vulnerability of smaller countries and the risks associated with an unchecked dominant power. These concerns prompted countries to explore new avenues of cooperation to balance US influence. Simultaneously, protests in the West begin to take on a more violent and destructive nature as activists accounted for the fact that the greatest peace march in history couldn’t stop an invasion based on an obvious lie. 

In the aftermath of the destruction of Iraq, key emerging economies - Brazil, Russia, India, China, and later South Africa - began to strengthen their economic and political ties. The idea of forming a coalition of influential emerging powers to counterbalance US dominance and promote multipolarity gained momentum.

The 2006 meeting that started BRIC was an informal meeting of the foreign ministers of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. The meeting took place on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York in September 2006. The main purpose of this meeting was to discuss issues of mutual interest and explore areas of cooperation among the four countries.

During the meeting, the foreign ministers of Brazil, Russia, India, and China recognized their shared goals and aspirations as major emerging economies with significant global influence. They acknowledged the potential for increased economic, political, and strategic cooperation among their nations and identified common interests in promoting multipolarity and strengthening their positions in the international arena.

The term "BRIC" was coined by then-chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Jim O'Neill, in a research paper titled "Building Better Global Economic BRICs." He used the acronym to refer to the four countries' growing economic potential and their importance in shaping the future of the global economy.

Following the 2006 meeting, the concept of BRIC gained traction, and the leaders of the four countries held their first formal summit in Yekaterinburg, Russia, in June 2009.