The Kuwait War at 30: The birth of a unipolar world

KUWAIT. March 11, 1991. The bodies of dead Iraqi soldiers hang from a truck abandoned by the fleeing Iraqi army by a road leading to Iraq. 
The Gulf War which was marked by the introduction of live news broadcasts from the front lines of the battle, principally by the U.S. network CNN. The war has also earned the nickname Video Game War after the daily broadcast of images from cameras on board U.S. bombers during Operation Desert Storm.
Photograph: Pascal Guyot/AFP/Getty

August 2nd, 2020, marks the 30th anniversary of one of the most consequential and perhaps the most underestimated wars in recent history. On 2nd August 1990, between 100,000 (according to Iraqi claims) and 300,000 (according to US claims) Iraqi troops invaded and occupied Kuwait, which Saddam Hussein immediately named Iraq’s nineteenth province.

In response, President George H. W. Bush and the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher formed a coalition of 39 countries, including many Arab and Islamic countries, 28 of which provided troops for the war. In all, some 956,600 troops from 28 countries, including 700,000 US and 53,000 British troops, were deployed. More than 2,250 combat aircraft, 1,800 of which were American, took part in the fighting.

The Good War

What came to be known as “The First Gulf War” is often described as the “good war” as opposed to the 2003 illegal invasion of Iraq by President George W. Bush. First of all, it was a legal war in the sense that the UN Security Council Resolution 678, issued on 29 November 1990, authorized the use of force to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

The war certainly resulted in a clear victory and permanently kicked Saddam’s forces out of Kuwait. It saved Saudi Arabia, which could have been Saddam’s next target had the invasion of Kuwait ended successfully.

It also stabilized the price of oil and US control of it, which would have been endangered if Saddam Hussein had managed to gain control of Kuwaiti and Saudi and perhaps UAE oil, as well as Iraq’s substantial oil deposits.

However, many dark aspects were also associated with the war, which are often forgotten. The First Gulf War will be remembered for a number of events that took place for the first time in world history.

It was the first war to introduce live news broadcasts from the front lines of the battle, principally by the newly established global US network CNN. The images of invasion, human hostages, anti-aircraft flak, Scuds and Cruise missiles, wailing sirens, and burning oil fields were broadcast live on our TV screens.

Cruise missiles fired from US warships in the Persian Gulf were used for the first time in warfare. Altogether, 297 Tomahawk Cruise missiles and 35 CALCMs were fired at Iraqi targets, and 1,332 GPS units were fielded. There were also more than 100,000 coalition sorties.

The war earned the nickname “Video Game War” after the first daily broadcast of images from cameras on board US bombers.

The war brought together the largest coalition of forces from 39 countries since the Second World War. It cost the United States practically nothing, because out of the estimated $61 billion dollars cost of the war, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait covered $36 billion, in addition to providing free oil to the coalition forces, and Germany and Japan covered $16 billion of the cost, and other countries contributed smaller amounts.

False propaganda to justify the war was used extensively. The daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador in Washington was filmed acting as a hospital nurse, claiming that Iraqi forces had thrown away babies from the incubators in the hospital where she allegedly worked.

Such lies provided a model for much-more extensive lies about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction which could be fired at the West in a few minutes and all other lies concocted by the Office for Special Plans set up by Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith in the Pentagon to manufacture false intelligence, and the Dodgy Dossier produced for the British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The Kuwait war again revealed the extent of US military power and put an end to war-weariness and hesitations that had been created in the minds of the American public following the defeat in the Vietnam War, the so-called Vietnam Syndrome. It made wars again acceptable and even popular to a certain section of US population.

US and Arab Assistance to Saddam during the Iran-Iraq War

However, the most important factor about the Kuwait War that has often been overlooked was that it was the first war since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War that ushered in a unipolar world led by the United States, a factor that led to more unilateral US wars, mainly in the Middle East.

It should be noted that when Saddam Hussein tore up the Algiers Agreement that he had reached with the late Mohammad Reza Shah of Iran delineating the border between the two countries, and launched a massive invasion of Iran along 1,000 kilometers of the border on 22 September 1980, he was whole-heartedly supported by the rest of the Persian Gulf states, and ironically Kuwait had been his closest ally.

The Arab rulers provided him with logistical assistance and free oil during the war and lent him billions of dollars. The bulk of the financial help came from Saudi Arabia, but Kuwait also initially “lent” the Iraqi dictator $14 billion to help finance his war with Iran.

The deadly Iran-Iraq war that resulted in over a million casualties from the two sides eventually came to an end on 20 August 1988, with Security Council Resolution 598.

After the war, Saddam believed that his debts had to be written off because he claimed that without his war against Iran all Persian Gulf Arab states would have been vulnerable to the Islamic revolution. He maintained that he had saved the Arab sheikhdoms from extinction and was worthy of greater respect.

However, Kuwait refused his pleas and demanded prompt payment. Saddam regarded these demands as the height of ingratitude.

Also, the price of oil had been falling, partly because Kuwait had raised its oil production from the OPEC quota of 1.5 million barrels a day to 1.9 million just weeks before the invasion. This had lowered the oil price from $18 to $14 a barrel, which reduced Iraqi revenue from oil by $4 billion.

Saddam also accused Kuwait of stealing Iraqi oil by drilling at a slant northwards along their frontier, and extracting more than its quota from their jointly-owned Rumaila Oilfield, a claim that Kuwait haughtily dismissed.

Above all, Saddam was in a desperate economic situation and having emerged undefeated out of the Iran-Iraq War mainly due to US support, he wanted to steal the mantle of the late Mohammad Reza Shah of Iran granted to him by the United States as the “Persian Gulf’s policeman”.

So, he invaded Kuwait in the hope of a quick victory, but this was his second major miscalculation after his invasion of Iran.

The Strange Glaspie Conversation

There has been some controversy about whether the United States deliberately lured Saddam Hussein to Kuwait to find an excuse to destroy the Iraqi army now that Iran’s capabilities had been greatly diminished or whether Saddam misread US intentions.

We must remember that during the Iran-Iraq war, Henry Kissinger said that it was such a pity that both sides could not lose.

After helping Saddam to avoid defeat in the war with Iran and in the process to greatly weaken Iran, it is argued that some in the US government decided that it was now time to destroy Iraq’s capabilities so that it did not pose a threat to Israel, as many Israeli leaders alleged that he did. They base their reasoning on the strange conversation that took place between Saddam Hussein and the US ambassador in Baghdad April Glaspie during the run-up to the war.

On 25th of July, or just about a week before invading Kuwait, Saddam met with Glaspie and said that he placed America not among Iraq’s enemies but among its friends. He criticized US response to his imminent invasion of Kuwait, about which he had already informed the Americans.

He protested to Glaspie: “So what can it mean when America says it will now protect its friends? It can only mean prejudice against Iraq. This stance plus manoeuvres and statements which have been made has encouraged the UAE and Kuwait to disregard Iraqi rights…”

Glaspie replied: “I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait … Frankly, we can only see that you have deployed massive troops in the south. Normally that would not be any of our business. But when this happens in the context of what you said on your national day, then when we read the details in the two letters of the Foreign Minister, then when we see the Iraqi point of view that the measures taken by the UAE and Kuwait is, in the final analysis, parallel to military aggression against Iraq, then it would be reasonable for me to be concerned.” (1)

Glaspie further said that she had served in Kuwait 20 years earlier; but, “then, as now, we took no position on these Arab affairs.” Any reasonable person would conclude from Glaspie’s remarks that the United States had no opinion on “the Arab-Arab conflicts” and would not “adopt a position on Arab affairs” that she was giving Saddam a green light for the invasion.

Whether the impression given by Glaspie was due to naivety or was a deliberate attempt to mislead Saddam, the fact is that Saddam took the bait and concluded that the United States would not intervene in the war on the side of Kuwait, a very costly mistake as it proved later.

Iraqi Losses and Casualties

As the result of the Kuwait war, 3,300 Iraqi tanks, 2,100 APCs, 2,200 Artillery Pieces and 110 aircraft were destroyed, 19 ships were sunk and a further six were damaged. In one noted incident, two USAF stealth planes bombed a bunker in Amiriya in Baghdad, mistaking it for a military target, causing the death of 408 Iraqi civilians, including 130 children, who had taken refuge in the shelter.

Some 80,000 Iraqi forces were captured, and after the war no-fly zones and crippling sanctions were imposed on Iraq which killed perhaps half a million Iraqi children, and those restrictions and occasional attacks on Iraqi positions continued right up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The number of casualties of the First Gulf War has always been a matter of contention. Although U.S. General Tommy Franks who led the invasion of Iraq famously declared, “We don’t do body counts”, there were some estimates of the casualties of the war. There were 147 combat-related and 145 non-combat related coalition casualties. But for obvious reasons, the number of Iraqi casualties has been often underestimated.

As US General Stanley A. McCrystal said in his inaugural speech as ISAF Commander in June 2009: “I believe the perception caused by civilian casualties is one of the most dangerous enemies we face.” However, in order to become aware of the true horror of war, it is important to get a fair estimate of the true casualties.

A joint study by Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), and Physicians for Global Survival, with a preface by Dr Hans C. von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary-General & UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq (1998-2000) and TFF Associate, provided the most accurate body counts based on the scientific examination of the figures. (2)

Those figures are completely different from the insultingly low figures provided by Western governments.

According to this study, the number of Iraqi soldiers killed range from 60,000 to 200,000, an estimated 25,000 to 30,000 in the ground war alone.

The estimates for civilian deaths as a direct result of the war range from 100,000 to 200,000. Heaps of Iraqi corpses were buried in mass graves in the desert when bunkers filled with conscripts who were still alive were bulldozed.

The Death Highway

One of the most gruesome examples of the killings occurred in the so-called “Death Highway”. As a large number of Iraqi soldiers and some civilians began fleeing from Kuwait toward Iraq, they were attacked by A-6 intruder attack jets of the United States Marine Corps’ 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing.

They blocked the head and tail of a massive vehicle column of the Iraqi Regular Army on Highway 80, bombarding them with MK-20 Rockeye II cluster bombs. Over the next 10 hours, scores of US Marine and US Air Force aircraft and US Navy pilots from USS Ranger attacked the convoy. Vehicles surviving the air attacks were later engaged by arriving coalition ground units, producing a long uninterrupted line of more than 300 stationary vehicles with the charred bodies of fleeing Iraqis smoldering in them.

Russian Attemps at Mediation are Ignored

As pointed out earlier on, perhaps the greatest legacy of the First Gulf War was to demonstrate the end of the Cold War and the start of US supremacy in a unipolar world, with all its positive and negative consequences that continue right to the present time.

The Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev was trying to mediate between Saddam Hussein and the West to allow for a face-saving formula for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait.

In his long interview with Frontline Oral History, the former Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz spoke about Gorbachev’s mediation and his trip to Moscow with Saddam’s message accepting the Russian terms.

Aziz said: “I reached an agreement with Gorbachev in the middle of the war. The agreement was based on full withdrawal from Kuwait, etc., and Gorbachev declared that agreement and he told me that he is going to summon the Security Council of the United Nations and turn that agreement between us into a UN resolution. George Bush didn’t listen to him. He moved in the ground attack without listening to Gorbachev.”

Aziz said that he was very surprised when war broke out.

On his way from Moscow to Baghdad, he stopped in Amman to brief King Hussein of Jordan about the agreement. The king and queen had been waiting for him and they had been very happy and hopeful that this would end the war and that there would be a ceasefire.

He was heading for Baghdad to give Saddam Hussein the good news, but he continued: “I went to Baghdad after that, when I woke up to head towards Baghdad I saw Cheney on the CNN in the Royal Guest House [announcing] that the ground attack had already started, so it was a great disappointment.” (3)

The unipolar world had already begun and the US president did not need anyone’s permission or agreement to wage war. It was now the case of Prometheus Unbound, free to operate on world stages without any restraints or regard for international law.

Note
1) Quoted in “Confrontation in the Gulf; Excerpts from Iraqi Document on Meeting with U.S. Envoy”, New York Times, 23 September 1990.
2) Body Count: Casualty Figures after Ten Years (First International Edition, March 2015).
3) Frontline, Oral History: Tariq Aziz.


The author

Farhang Jahanpour is a former professor and dean of the Faculty of Foreign Languages at the University of Isfahan. He is also a former senior research scholar at Harvard. He has taught for many years at the universities of Cambridge and Oxford and is a member of Kellogg College at the University of Oxford. And he is a TFF Associate and former board member.

If you think this was a relevant and trustworthy article, please show it here:

Related Posts

Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Jan Oberg PhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was...
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan Oberg PhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...