[author name scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed] (Last updated April 22, 2003) For a day-by-day summary of Iraq-related developments through the end of the combat phase of the war, see Iraq-U.S. Confrontation: Daily Developments http://www.crs.gov/products/browse/iraqdocs/iraqdaily.shtml . This report was created to provide information and analysis on the buildup to the 2003 war with Iraq and on the war itself. Since the combat phase of this conflict has ended, the report will not befurther updated. For current CRS products related to Iraq, see the CRS home page at http://www.crs.gov . The Background section of this report outlines the evolution of the conflictwith Iraq after September 11, 2001. This section is followed by a more detailed description andanalysis of U.S. policy and a survey of congressional actions on Iraq. The report then reviews arange of issues that the Iraq situation has raised for Congress. These issue discussions have beenwritten by CRS experts, and contact information is provided for congressional readers seekingadditional information. In this section and elsewhere, text boxes list CRS products that providein-depth information on the topics under discussion or on related topics. The final section links thereader to additional sources of information on the Iraq crisis. Bush Administration concerns about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction programs intensified after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. President Bush named Iraq, Iran, and NorthKorea as the "axis of evil" nations in his January 2002 State of the Union address. Vice PresidentCheney, in two August 2002 speeches, accused Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein of seeking weaponsof mass destruction to dominate the Middle East and threaten U.S. oil supplies. (1) These speechesfueled speculation that the United States might soon act unilaterally against Iraq. However, in aSeptember 12, 2002 speech to the United Nations General Assembly, President Bush pledged towork with the U.N. Security Council to meet the "common challenge" posed by Iraq. (2) H.J.Res. 114 , which became law ( P.L. 107-243 ) on October 16, authorized the use offorce against Iraq, and endorsed the President's efforts to obtain prompt Security Council action toensure Iraqi compliance with U.N. resolutions. On November 8, 2002, the Security Council, actingat U.S. urging, adopted Resolution 1441, giving Iraq a "final opportunity" to comply with thedisarmament obligations imposed under previous resolutions, or face "serious consequences." Prelude to War. During January-March 2003, theU.S. military buildup in the Persian Gulf intensified, as analysts speculated that mid- to late Marchseemed a likely time for an attack to be launched. Officials maintained that it would be possible toattack later, even in the extreme heat of summer, but military experts observed that conditions forfighting a war would be far better in the cooler months before May. Statements by President Bush,Secretary of State Colin Powell, and other top officials during January, February, and Marchexpressed a high degree of dissatisfaction over Iraq's compliance with Security Council disarmamentdemands. The President said on January 14, that "time is running out" for Iraq to disarm, adding thathe was "sick and tired" of its "games and deceptions." (3) On January 26, 2003, Secretary of StatePowell told the World Economic Forum, meeting in Davos, Switzerland, that "multilateralismcannot be an excuse for inaction" and that the United States "continues to reserve our sovereign rightto take military action against Iraq alone or in a coalition of the willing." President Bush presented a sweeping condemnation of Iraq in his State of the Union Address on January 28, 2003. "With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons," thePresident warned, "Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East andcreate deadly havoc in the region." The President told members of the armed forces that "somecrucial hours may lie ahead." Alleging that Iraq "aids and protects" the Al Qaeda terroristorganization, the President also condemned what he said was Iraq's "utter contempt" for the UnitedNations and the world. On February 5, 2003, Secretary of State Powell detailed to the UnitedNations Security Council what he described as Iraq's "web of lies" in denying that it has weaponsof mass destruction programs. On February 26, President Bush gave a major address on Iraq. Hesaid that the end of Hussein's regime would "deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron .... Andother regimes will be given a clear warning that support for terror will not be tolerated." ThePresident returned to an earlier Administration theme in declaring that post-Hussein Iraq would beturned into a democracy, which would inspire reform in other Middle Eastern states. (For analysisof the issues raised by the President, see below, The Administration ; Weapons of MassDestruction Issues ; Post-War Governance Issues ; and Implications for theMiddle East .) Final Diplomatic Efforts. Despite the resolve of U.S. officials, international support for an early armed confrontation remained limited. PresidentJacques Chirac of France was a leading critic of the U.S. approach while the Iraq issue remainedbefore the U.N. Security Council, maintaining that he was not convinced by the evidence presentedby Secretary of State Powell. On February 10, at a press conference in Paris with President Putinof Russia, Chirac said "nothing today justifies war." Speaking of weapons of mass destruction,Chirac added "I have no evidence that these weapons exist in Iraq." (4) France, Germany, and Russiaadvocated a strengthened inspections regime rather than an early armed conflict with Iraq, and Chinatook a similar position. On February 24, 2003, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Spain introduced what was called a "second resolution" at the U.N. Security Council, stating that Iraq had failed "to take thefinal opportunity afforded to it by Resolution 1441" to disarm. The proposed resolution wasregarded as authorizing the immediate use of force to disarm Iraq. On March 10, President Chiracsaid that his government would veto the resolution, and Russian officials said that their governmentwould likely follow the same course. Chirac's stance, and the Administration's lack of success in garnering other support for the "second resolution," seemed to convince U.S. officials that further diplomatic efforts at the UnitedNations would prove fruitless. President Bush flew to the Azores for a hastily-arranged meeting withthe prime ministers of Britain and Spain on Sunday, March 16, 2003. The meeting resulted in apledge by the three leaders to establish a unified, free, and prosperous Iraq under a representativegovernment. At a press conference after the meeting, President Bush stated that "Tomorrow is theday that we will determine whether or not democracy can work." On March 17, the threegovernments announced that they were withdrawing the proposed Security Council resolution, andPresident Bush went on television at 8:00 p.m. (EST) that evening to declare that unless SaddamHussein fled Iraq within 48 hours, the result would be "military conflict, commenced at the time ofour own choosing." The war began on the night of March 19, 2003, with an aerial attack against a location where Saddam Hussein was suspected to be meeting with top Iraqi officials. U.S. and British troopsentered Iraq on March 20, and while the invasion encountered resistance, particularly in its earlystages, U.S. forces had largely gained control of Baghdad, the capital, by April 9. The northern citiesof Kirkuk and Mosul fell shortly afterward, and on April 14, U.S. troops entered Tikrit, Saddam'sbirthplace and the last major population center outside coalition control. On April 15, PresidentBush declared that "the regime of Saddam Hussein is no more." (5) (For information and analysisrelated to the war itself, see below, Military Issues .) Public Reactions. In mid-January 2003, pollsshowed that a majority of Americans wanted the support of allies before the United States launcheda war against Iraq. The polls shifted on this point after the State of the Union message, with amajority coming to favor a war even without explicit U.N. approval. (6) Polls shifted further in theAdministration's direction following Secretary Powell's February 5 presentation to the SecurityCouncil. (7) Although subsequent polls showed someslippage in support for a war, President Bush'sspeech on the evening of March 17 rallied public support once again. A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken just afterward, showed that 71% supported war with Iraq and that 66% supported thePresident's decision not to seek a U.N. Security Council vote. (8) With the fighting underway, pollsshowed that more than seven in ten Americans continued to support the war, (9) and WashingtonPost-ABC News polling found that 69% felt that the right decision had been made even if noweapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. (10) Nonetheless, many Americans opposed the war,and large anti-war demonstrations took place in several cities on the weekend of March 15-16,followed by sharp protests in San Francisco and a large demonstration in New York after the fightingbegan. Major anti-war demonstrations had also occurred on the weekends of January 19-20 andFebruary 15-16, and there were demonstrations in support of Administration policy as well.