The paradox of sovereignty and the case of Iraq

Abstract

This thesis aims to understand the evolution of Iraq’s sovereignty during the Iraq War of 2003-2011, and to use the case of Iraq to reflect on the meaning, value and application of sovereignty in international relations today. The 2003 invasion of Iraq brought a striking loss of Iraq’s sovereignty. As the state collapsed and was rebuilt, over the next eight and a half years, Iraq’s sovereignty was reshaped alongside a bitter war and beginnings of a new political process. This thesis will evaluate the evolution of Iraq’s sovereignty throughout the processes of war, occupation, state rebuilding and democratic transition, focusing on key moments such as the 2003 invasion, the 2004 so-called “transfer of sovereignty” from the US to an interim Iraqi government, the 2005 elections, the 2006-2007 civil war, the signing of a SOFA between the US and Iraq in 2008 and finally the lead up to the 2011 US withdrawal. Throughout these events, Iraq’s sovereignty evolved towards a paradox in which continuing foreign presence could be justified through the rhetoric of a contingent sovereignty, while violations of sovereignty were claimed in the name of “protecting Iraqi sovereignty.” Reflecting on Iraq’s sovereignty in the post-war period reveals the continuation of this trend; despite the completion of US withdrawal from Iraq ending nearly nine years of occupation, the stability and independence of Iraq remain uncertain, as does its ability to maintain or exercise sovereignty. The notion of sovereignty as applied to Iraq may be a dangerous trend as ignores the basic principles of conventional sovereignty, which while legal fictions, are important.