Conflict Resolution: Kapitalpolitik

Economics is often used as the motives of the state to intervene (although

biased interventions incorporated into the realm of Idealpolitik) or even war. But is it
always the economy? Surely depth analysis is required in answering these questions,
because there are at least four kinds of motives underlying the state of their decision
to go to war or intervene in other countries. As an example of Iran-Iraq war and
Eritrea-Ethiopia, the war showed the fear on both sides of the imposition of
government (Idealpolitik problem) or explicitly targeting its resources1.
We will discuss about "Kapitalpolitik". It is an approach that allows us to see
the backdrop of a country at war or intervene in other countries. Kapitalpolitik
"blame" the economic motive as the main actor in the war or intervention done by the
state. It believes that the economic factor is a factor in inter-state conflict, but again
this can be questioned but what is clear is the economic factor could be the reason and
a way out to solve the conflict between the states.
If explored deeper, war is not an economically profitable, no one wants to
build something and then destroyed because of the war. But the cold war had proven
that "war" is beneficial, massive arms race make war into something profitable.
Age changes occur as the rapid pace of globalization, specifically in the
economic field. Now when we talk about the economy could be interpreted as an
offensive act, one little word or action can be bad for relations. If viewed from the
broader context there are two economic assets in the current era, those are oil and
transportation route2.
For the oil problem, everyone must be sensitive if the oil price is rising. Then
how is it in the international sphere? The issue of the oil whether that the problem of
distribution, price fluctuation, or even scarcity not only affects developing countries
alone but affects the developed countries3. That is why the issue of oil is said to be a
trigger for conflict. In addition, the transportation issue is not only an effect on the
economy, but also geopolitical issue4. Who wore whose path; if there is a country that
1 Peter Wallensteen. 2002. Understanding Conflict Resolution. London: Sage
Publications, p. 114.
2 Ibid., p. 120
3 Ibid
4 Peter Wallensteen. Loc. cit

closes the path of other countries would potentially be in conflict, because a trade
route is like the pulse of a nation. It could seek another path, but if other countries had
the same thoughts, future conflicts can arise again.
But in its development, again the involvement of capital problem in the
occurrence of a conflict is still questionable, because it is theoretically unclear
whether good economic reason that an increase or decrease in growth as the
foundation of why is the conflict, so that the most appropriate question is how the
"capital" can involved or even become a source of conflict5.
Examples of Conflict: Iran and Iraq War
One example of conflicts that could describe the Kapitalpolitik is Iran-Iraq
war. Iran-Iraq War, (1980-1988) was a prolonged military conflict between Iran and
Iraq that occurred in the 1980s. Open war began on September 22, 1980, when Iraq
invaded Iran's armed forces west along the common border between the two
countries, though Iraq claimed that the war had begun earlier that month, on
September 4, when Iran shelled a border post. The fighting ended with a ceasefire in
1988, although the return of normal diplomatic relations and the withdrawal does not
occur until the signing of a formal peace treaty on August 16, 1990.
The root of this war lies in a number of territorial and political disputes
between Iraq and Iran. Iraq wants to dominate the oil-rich border region of Iran,
Khuzestan region inhabited mostly by ethnic Arabs in which Iraq seeks to extend
some form of sovereignty. Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein, would like to reiterate his
country's sovereignty over the Shatt al-'Arab edge, the river formed by the confluence
of the Tigris and Euphrates that historically the border between the two countries 6.
Saddam also concerned over the Iranian Islamic revolutionary government efforts to
incite rebellion among groups of Iraqi-Shiite majority. By attacking when it did, Iraq
took advantage of the disorder appears and isolation of new government of Iran (who
later clashed with the United States on foreclosures US embassy in Tehran by
militant) and Iranian armed forces demoralized and dissolution of Iran.
In September 1980 the Iraqi army with carefully developed along a broad front
to Khuzestan, making Iran surprised. Iraqi forces attacked the city of Khorramshahr
5 Ibid, p. 151
6 Accessed from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/31417/Shatt-Al-Arab

but failed to take the essential oil refining center of Abadan, and in December 1980
the Iraqi attack stalled about 50-75 miles (80-120 km) in Iran after meeting resistance
suddenly

powerful

Iran.

Iranian

counterattack

using

revolutionary

militia

(Revolutionary Guards) to increase the strength of the regular armed force Iraq began
to give ground in 1981. The first Iranian push Iraq back across the Karun River in Iran
and then recaptured Khorramshahr in 1982. Later that year Iraq voluntarily withdraw
its troops from the entire territory of Iran were arrested and began searching for a
peace deal with Iran. But under the leadership of Ruhollah Khomeini, who bore a
strong personal animosity against Saddam, Iran remains stubborn and continue the
war in an attempt to overthrow the Iraqi leader. Iraqi Defense solidified after troops
defending their own land, and the war settled into a stalemate with only static runs
inside and along the Iraqi border. Iran repeatedly launched an infantry attack using a
wave of attacks that consist mostly of conscripts trained and armed, but was arrested
by the electric air guns and more superior than Iraq. The two countries are involved in
air and missile attacks on towns sporadic each and military installations and oil. They
also attacked the oil tanker shipments respectively in the Persian Gulf, and Iran
attacks in Kuwait and other Gulf countries tanker made the United States and some
Western European countries put warships in the Persian Gulf to ensure the flow of oil
to the world7.
The capacity of the two oil-exporting countries have a very reduced many
times because of air strikes and closing the pipe, and the consequent decline in
revenue and foreign currency income they result in programs of economicdevelopment of these countries is hampered. Iraq war effort openly financed by Saudi
Arabia, Kuwait, and the neighboring Arab countries other and tacitly supported by the
United States and the Soviet Union, while the main ally of Iran is Syria and Libya.
Iraq continues to demand peace in the mid-1980s, but the international reputation
damaged by reports that they have made use of lethal chemical weapons against
Iranian forces. In the mid 1980s, the military continues to run, but in August 1988
with the worsening economy of Iran and Iraq on the battlefield advantage to force Iran
to accept the mediation of the UN ceasefire previously rejected by Resolution no.
5988.
7 Erwin Kurnia. 2014. Analisa Perang Teluk Iraq Vs Kuwait. Jakarta: Indonesian
Defense University
8 Accessed from http://www.history.com/topics/iran-iraq-war