Iraq, Syria, and Libya during the Arab Spring if there's no Iraq War in 2003

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,733
SoCal
If the U.S. wouldn't have invaded Iraq in 2003, what would Iraq, Syria, and Libya have looked like during the Arab Spring?
 
Apr 2017
1,678
U.S.A.
There may not have been an arab spring without the attempt at democracy in Iraq. If there was it may have went the same, Al Qaeda/ISIS were only one part of these wars, they may have still happened in a similar fashion. Saddam was especially skilled at putting down rebellions, so attempts to overthrow him may have failed. Or who knows, maybe Iran and Syria would aid the rebels and a war similar to Syria would be going on in Iraq instead. Libya would either be like it is now or a semi-stable young democracy. Syria would probably either be in civil war or Assad would have crushed the rebellion without a powerful enemy like ISIS to contend with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,733
SoCal
There may not have been an arab spring without the attempt at democracy in Iraq. If there was it may have went the same, Al Qaeda/ISIS were only one part of these wars, they may have still happened in a similar fashion. Saddam was especially skilled at putting down rebellions, so attempts to overthrow him may have failed. Or who knows, maybe Iran and Syria would aid the rebels and a war similar to Syria would be going on in Iraq instead. Libya would either be like it is now or a semi-stable young democracy. Syria would probably either be in civil war or Assad would have crushed the rebellion without a powerful enemy like ISIS to contend with.
You know, I wonder if the U.S. and NATO would have militarily intervened on the side of the Iraqi rebels in this TL. If so, this might have meant that there would have been no NATO intervention in Libya and that thus Gaddafi's regime would have survived.
 
Apr 2017
1,678
U.S.A.
You know, I wonder if the U.S. and NATO would have militarily intervened on the side of the Iraqi rebels in this TL. If so, this might have meant that there would have been no NATO intervention in Libya and that thus Gaddafi's regime would have survived.
US/NATO intervening on the side of Iranian back rebels is problematic (look at Yemen), although I could easily see them aiding the Kurds. As for Qaddafi, hard to say. Libya's proximity to Europe may make it a necessity to intervene.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,733
SoCal
US/NATO intervening on the side of Iranian back rebels is problematic (look at Yemen), although I could easily see them aiding the Kurds. As for Qaddafi, hard to say. Libya's proximity to Europe may make it a necessity to intervene.
If Gore wins in 2000, then there might have been a U.S.-Iran rapprochement of sorts in the 2000s. This would have made a U.S. militarily intervention in favor of Iraqi Shiites during the Arab Spring easier. As for Libya, Gaddafi appears to have done a good job in keeping African migrants out of Europe. Of course, that didn't prevent the Europeans from militarily intervening in Libya in real life, so yeah.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,733
SoCal
Also, would NATO have had the military resources to simultaneously intervene in both Iraq and Libya?
 
Apr 2017
1,678
U.S.A.
Also, would NATO have had the military resources to simultaneously intervene in both Iraq and Libya?
The amount of troops used in the Libyan intervention was very minor compared to Iraq, unless there was a large ground commitment inside Libya and Iraq, NATO could easily intervene in both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist