Running head: HISTORY ESSAY 1

Compare and Contrast the First Gulf War and the Balkans Wars

Student’s Name

University Name
HISTORY ESSAY 2

The First Gulf War and The Balkans War

This paper is the analysis and the view of two major wars of history named First Gulf

War and the Balkans War. The Gulf War, which occurred during 1990 – 1991 at a time when the

Kuwait is attacked by Iraq. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the United Nation

and the armies of United States replayed in a way by dragging and forcing the armed forces of

Iraqi origin to be expelled from Kuwait. This was basically the influential success of the United

States and its military alliances. On the other hand, the Balkan Wars that contained inter-state

ethnic disputes, which happened in the Peninsula of Balkan during 1991-2000/2001. There were

4 Balkan states, which include the Serbia, Bulgaria, Montenegro and Greece, fought the Ottoman

Empire during the first war. From all of them, Bulgaria faced downfall during the second war.

And resultantly the Ottoman Empire lost most of its area to the territory of Europe. Austria-

Hungary, despite the fact that not a party to the warring factions, turned out to be generally

weaker by way of an amply broadened Serbia, forced itself for the alliance of South Slavic

groups of people. This is the war, which fixed the phase in 1914 for the crisis of Balkans and

subsequently filled in as a precursor to the 1st World War" and lately of the 1990s wars. The

perspectives behind the first Balkans War are that the Ottoman Empire could not adapt to the

changed ground realities, run state’s affairs smoothly, effectively control escalating indigenous

movements of the multi-cultural communities. In the face of brewing crisis, the international

influential states were at odds with each other to find an amicable solution and suggest some apt

solutions to the Ottoman Empire. Consequently, the four Balkan states were forced to decide

their own political future; where, it is pertinent to mention that, a newly formed Balkan Alliance

became buoyant that they were in a position to overthrow the Turks.

HISTORY ESSAY 3

From historical perspective, the 1st Gulf War (Iraq Vs Kuwait) and the Balkans War

(1991 – 2001) are different in terms of the dynamics of war or the wars theology. The Iraqi War

under late Saddam Hussein (its former President) was fought with the neighbouring country i.e.,

Kuwait mostly on the premise of economic factors, while the Balkans war, which was fought in

the earlier Yugoslavia (currently disintegrated) on purely ethnic grounds between different

communities, mainly the Croatians, Serbians and the Albanians (Cox, 2017).

As for the Iraq-Kuwaiti war, the historical accounts expound that before the war, the two

countries had normal relations and supported each other on the international issues. For example,

Kuwait laid its full support to Iraq alongwith other Persian countries in Iran’s war with Iraq in

1982, before attempting diplomacy between the warring countries. Kuwait poured millions of

dollars as debt to Iraq to contain the Revolutionary Guards of Iran (the elite wing of the Iranian

military), which also antagonized Iran, compelling it to take counter measures against Kuwait.

Also during the war, Kuwait supported Iraq by offering its port for trading Iraqi oil to the

international buyers, when Iraqi port, Basra was closed due to the conflict (Walsh, 2016). Yet

such diplomatic bonhomie between the two nations appeared short-lived and resulted in ensuing

incursion of Iraq on Kuwait. This happened as Iraq faced serious debt servicing problem of

billions of dollar it owed to Kuwait to run its war machine on Iran as Kuwait was not willing to

write-off its debt, and Iraq even reasoned that Kuwait also benefited from the Iran-Iraq war in

terms of curtailing presumed Iranian supremacy on Kuwait (Cox, 2017).

Before the Iraqi incursion of Kuwait in the autumn of 1990, all international mediations

spearheaded by the United States failed to achieve to restore normal diplomatic relations. Major

blitzkrieg by Iraq on Kuwait ended in two days; however, the occupants stayed for over 7

months, and Saddam Hussein declared Kuwait as another province of Iraq (Cox, 2017)
HISTORY ESSAY 4

As for the Balkans war, first we will have to dwell into the meaning of the Balkans in

terms of topography. This term is used to categorize closely connected geographical borders

outside of the Balkan Headland, involving interconnected states of Albania, Bosnia and

Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Kosovo (former autonomous state of Serbia), Croatia, Montenegro and

Macedonia. Before 1991, these states were part of greater former Yugoslavia. As for Yugoslavia,

it has been accounted that, whilst apparently labeled as Marxist state, it disintegrated from the

Soviet Union’s domination in 1948, and opted to go as an institutional member of the Non-

Aligned Movement of 1961, and assumed a more democratic and less exploitive system of rule

as likened with similar East European socialist states in the Cold War era. However, with the

collapse of the former U.S.S.R (the Soviet Union) due to very intricate machinations and the so-

called Afghan Jihad, ostensibly led by the United States, CIA, the disintegration of the

Yugoslavian states triggered, ethnic infighting between warring states, resulting into millions of

deaths in the region (Tasić, 2017).

Historical accounts tell us that during the period 1999/2001, successive wars were fought

purely on ethnic grounds between these states, which resulted in disintegration of the

Yugoslavia, where integral sates announced freedom from it, but the issue of ethnicity of the

newly created states mainly (i.e. the Croatia, the Albania and the Serbs) remained unattended,

when these were accepted by the international community. However, it is also a matter of fact

that some of the inter-related wars culminated peacefully through negotiations, which again

spearheaded by the United States, yet with considerable financial damage to the area. At first, the

Yugoslavian army fought tooth-and-nail to prevent the impending disintegration by devastating

HISTORY ESSAY 5

the separatist states; however, it had to succumb under pressure of the government of Serbia

through conjuring up nationalism in the Serbians, where inner intention of the Serbian

government’s hierarchy was to maintain harmony of the Serbs as one nation state. This fact was

also authenticated by a U.N report of 1994, which declared that the raison d'être behind the Serbs

nationalism was not to re-establish Yugoslavia, but to craft a larger Serbia, from portions of

Bosnia and Croatia. Going by the above accounts, it is clear that in case of Balkans War, the

legacy of the past, or history, mattered more as compared to the Iraq-Kuwait War (Halliday,

1994)

After the culmination of WW-II, Yugoslavian harmony was highest on the agenda for the

United States. The integration of marxism in Eastern Europe in 1989, the confederacy of

Germany a year in future, and the looming breakdown of the U.S.S.R, all aided in diminishing

Yugoslavia’s partisan solidity. With Eastern European states turning their backs from the

Marxist government, and on the road to democratic transitions, the United States consideration

turned away from the Marxist government and undermined the widespread financial sustenance

essential to reserve a Yugoslav financial stature then nearing disintegration (Hayden, 2013). The

absenteeism of the U.S.S.R’s danger to the honour and accord of the communist state and its

integral fragments destined that a convincing motivation for harmony and collaboration was

detached. With the George Bush senior’s government absorbed mainly in the clandestine efforts

of disintegrating the former U.S.S.R, diplomatic crisis that ensued the Iraq-Kuwait war and

Germany, Yugoslavia, somehow lost somewhere on the diplomatic radar of the United States,

the little strategic importance it once had in the Cold War era. Though the U.S endeavored in

1990 to arrange nearly restricted arrangement with its European partners, in the event the
HISTORY ESSAY 6

Yugoslavian turmoil got gory, the Europeans sustained a low-key profile. This also had a factor

in disintegration of the Yugoslavia.

As appeared in the preceding paragraphs, there was marked difference in cooperation by

the international community at large and the U.S in particular. With oil as major portion of the

United States’ international diplomacy, the U.S had greater eye set on the diplomatic offensive to

settle the dispute between Iraq and Kuwait. On the other hand, we see a belated response by the

U.N., the NATO and the U.S to kick start diplomacy to reach a peaceful settlement to ethnic

crisis of the former Yugoslav and Kosovars in particular (Kaufman, 2002).

It is unfortunate that the western governments and particularly the U.S wasted almost

eight years, when pre-emptive mediation could have delivered positive results. Washington paid

little ears to the suggestions for increasing U.N. missions and the Organization for Security &

Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) setup for Kosovo, or to align Kosovar communities on table for

dialogs (Badsey & Latawski, 2003). In the international diplomacy, we see same attitude of the

West and in particular the United States, that they wait as an ostrich for a brewing diplomatic

conflict to unleash blood on the streets before attempting any meaningful diplomatic offensive to

reach peaceful settlements.

International diplomacy is driven by varied national interest of countries across the

world, which include gaining financial, geographical, diplomatic, social or cultural supremacy

over opposing nations. We have seen norms of diplomacy in the bi-polar world (pre-1990s) and

uni-polar world (post-1990s, i.e. with disintegration of the mighty U.S.S.R). We have seen that

in Iraq Vs Kuwait War, the conflict involved economic factors (the oil trade, where economic

engines of the West were at stake) with a little historical background of the Ottoman dynasty, on
HISTORY ESSAY 7

the other hand, we see loose and late response by the West (including of course, the U.S) to settle

the ethnic disputes of the former Yugoslavian states aka Balkans War.
HISTORY ESSAY 8

References

Badsey, S., & Latawski, P. (2003). Britain, NATO, and the lessons of the Balkan conflicts, 1991-

1999. London: Frank Cass.

Cox, A. (2017). Wilsonian Ambitions for American Engagement in the First Gulf War. History

Compass, 15(1), e12365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hic3.12365

Halliday, F. (1994). The Gulf War 1990–1991 and the study of international relations. Review Of

International Studies, 20(02), 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s026021050011784x

Kaufman, J. (2002). NATO and the former Yugoslavia. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

Hayden, R. (2013). From Yugoslavia to the western Balkans. Leiden: Brill.

Tasić, D. (2017). James Pettifer and Tom Buchanan, eds, War in the Balkans; Conflicts and

Diplomacy before World War IPettiferJames and BuchananTom, eds, War in the Balkans;

Conflicts and Diplomacy before World War I, I.B. Tauris: London, 2015; 320 pp.;

9781784531904, £69.00 (hbk). European History Quarterly, 47(3), 576-578.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265691417711663af

Walsh, K. (2016). The Lessons of the First Gulf War Still Linger 25 Years on. The Lessons of the

First Gulf War Still Linger 25 Years on. Retrieved 20 January 2016, from

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-01-17/the-lessons-of-the-first-gulf-war-still-linger-

25-years-on