The "War on Terror" from a constructivist and marxist point of view

I will try to explain the Iraq war in 2003 from a constructivist / marxist point of view that takes into account the economic background and the underlying principles of capitalism. I will also show why the concept of a "capitalist peace" is eventually not applicable to world politics.
This does not necessarily reflect my own opinion on the Iraq war, but I believe it is a very interesting perspective on the matter.

Constructivist theory explains International Relations by focussing on the formation of actors, structures and politics over time. Every actor, every institution and every political outcome of the system of I.R. is understood as a result of mutual interactions and social processes that take place between individuals, states and other actors in a certain political context. Constructivism argues that this political context is also created by man and needs to be understood in the same way. In short, nothing can really be taken for granted.

Constructivism thus understands capitalism as a form of social life where the reification of everyday life has extended to the point that human labour is transformed into a good that workers need to sell on the job market. Unlike realist or liberal theories that incorporate capitalism as a given, almost natural state, marxist constructivism is challenging the idea of capitalism itself.

Capitalism is ever-expanding by definition as it is based on the principle of a growing economy. All countries of the western world have more or less accepted capitalism as their preferred economic system. The grade in which capitalism influences the respective societies varies from country to country.
Capitalism strives to create private spheres of influence (the free market) in which the states' governments play little or no role in order to ensure the unlimited accumulation of wealth.

The theory of "Fordism" explains why capitalism was especially successful in the USA: Big companies like Ford (hence "Fordism") cooperated with unions and the government to create a very dynamic and powerful capitalist economy. The idea behind this is to structure society in a way that every part is serving the economy. No governmental restrictions or working class uprising should slow down the process of continuous growth and accumulation. This strong economy allowed the USA to become a major hegemon in world politics in the 20th century.
The biggest problem that arises with this economic system is the growing need for resources, especially oil. Since the USA has a relatively small number of oil fields in its territory, it soon became obvious that it needed access to sources of oil from other regions of the world.

After World War II, from which the United States emerged as an unprecedented global power alongside the Soviet Union, American I.R. strategists envisioned a world order that was tailored to fit the American economy and would ensure a constant supply of resources. This was especially important considering the upcoming Cold War. In practice, this meant that the USA sought to expand its influence to the middle east, where some of the world's biggest oil fields are located.

Some constructivist scholars argue that the "War on Terror" after 9/11 was intended to secure the USA against terrorist threats and at the same time establish a world-wide American dominance. This would serve the American economy in multiple ways: alongside the establishment of USA dominance, more countries would accept a capitalist economy and turn towards global trade, providing new key markets for the American economy. Also, the necessary resources (oil) to keep the economy growing would be provided.

In short, the "War on Terror", including the Iraq war, can be explained by the historical implementation of a fordist capitalism that forced the USA to strive for global hegemony in order to ensure constant economic growth.

This explanation also proves the concept of a "capitalist peace" wrong. Even between two capitalist states that benefit from trading with each other, there will eventually be competition for the finite resources on this planet, because both of their capitalist economies are looking to expand and grow.