2003 invasion of Iraq

On March 20, 2003, a large contingent of United States and British combat forces invaded Iraq, precipitating the 2003 war in Iraq. Forces from Australia and Poland also took part. The invasion came after the expiration of a 48-hour deadline set by U.S. President George W. Bush, demanding that Saddam Hussein and his two sons Uday and Qusay leave Iraq.

The United States, with support from 45,000 British, a little over 2,000 Australian and 200 Polish combat forces invaded Iraq primarily through their staging area in Kuwait. Coalition forces are also supporting Iraqi Kurdish militia troops (some estimates put their numbers upwards of 50,000).

The U.S. Third Division moved out westward and then northward through the desert toward Baghdad, while a U.S. marine division and a U.K. expeditionary force moved northward through marshland.

The US military code name for the 2003 invasion of Iraq is Operation Iraqi Freedom. The UK military operations in this war are being conducted under the name of Operation Telic. [1] (telic means directed towards a goal). The Australian codename is Operation Falconer.

The invasion is politically supported by between 35 and 45 nations, a group that has been dubbed by the Bush administration as the "Coalition of the willing". The only known fighting forces are from the United States, Britain, Australia, and Poland. Ten other countries are known to have offered small numbers of noncombat forces, mostly either medical teams and specialists in decontamination.

The invasion has been condemned by Russia, France, China, Germany, and the Arab League.

Several nations like Austria have said the invasion is against international law, specifically because it lacks the validity of a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing military force. The Egyptian former United Nations Secretary General Boutrous Boutrous-Ghali has condemned the invasion as a violation of the UN Charter. Austria and Switzerland disallow military flights through their air space.

The position of opponents generally reflects the viewpoint expressed by George Bush, Sr. and Brent Scowcroft in their comments regarding the previous Gulf War in the article "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" in the 2 March 1998 editon of Time magazine:

"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,' and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well ... Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different—and perhaps barren—outcome."

The United States and Britain maintain it is a legal invasion which they are within their rights to undertake. Canada is among the nations which agree with this interpretation of the use of sovereign force.

Related entries

The 2003 Iraq war timeline informs about the ongoing military events.

See 2003 invasion of Iraq casualties for a listing of casualties of the conflict.

For an overview about the 2003 invasion of Iraq by an US-lead coalition, see 2003 invasion of Iraq, but there are many other articles on the 2003 Iraq war or linked to that war. This page presents this list.

2003 invasion of Iraq

Related entries

History of Iraq

Situation in Iraq

Iraq disarmament

Support and opposition for the 2003 invasion of Iraq

Military strategy, events and forces

War casualities