2008 Woodie Awards
The Bush Doctrine: success or failure?
Dr. Mir Zohair Husain
Special to the Vanguard
Issue date: 10/1/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 6 next >
President George W. Bush's State of the Union address on Jan. 29, 2002, gave citizens a preview of the new U.S. defense strategy: "We must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world …. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather." On June 1, 2002, Bush clarified his foreign policy in his Graduation Address at the West Point military academy, where he compared today's security situation to the Cold War:
"For much of the last century, America's defense relied on the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment …. Deterrence, the promise of massive retaliation against nations, means nothing against shadowy terrorist networks with no nation or citizens to defend. Containment is not possible when unbalanced dictators with weapons of mass destruction can deliver those weapons on missiles or secretly provide them to terrorist allies…. If we wait for threats to fully materialize we will have waited too long….. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html)."
The Bush Doctrine has conflated two distinct political principles - pre-emption and prevention. Pre-emption, which is an international actor's use of military force to prevent or disable an imminent attack, is permitted by international law. Even Christianity has a doctrine of "just war" allowing a state to engage in pre-emptive war if it is in clear, present or immediate danger of being invaded. Prevention, on the other hand, entails a military strike by a state that faces no imminent threat of aggression. The doctrine of preventive war assumes that the enemy will undertake future aggression, and that an immediate military strike could eliminate a future threat.
Two historical examples will illustrate the doctrine of preemption and prevention. In early June 1967, Israeli leaders determined that the numerical superiority of the Arab armed forces, along with Soviet military aid, would in time threaten Israel's existence. The Jewish state's "preventive war" that ensued destroyed the military machines of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. A classic example of "preventive war" is Israel's air strike against Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981. The Israeli leaders claimed that Saddam Hussein would use nuclear weapons to destroy the Jewish state and therefore prevention was justified.
"For much of the last century, America's defense relied on the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment …. Deterrence, the promise of massive retaliation against nations, means nothing against shadowy terrorist networks with no nation or citizens to defend. Containment is not possible when unbalanced dictators with weapons of mass destruction can deliver those weapons on missiles or secretly provide them to terrorist allies…. If we wait for threats to fully materialize we will have waited too long….. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html)."
The Bush Doctrine has conflated two distinct political principles - pre-emption and prevention. Pre-emption, which is an international actor's use of military force to prevent or disable an imminent attack, is permitted by international law. Even Christianity has a doctrine of "just war" allowing a state to engage in pre-emptive war if it is in clear, present or immediate danger of being invaded. Prevention, on the other hand, entails a military strike by a state that faces no imminent threat of aggression. The doctrine of preventive war assumes that the enemy will undertake future aggression, and that an immediate military strike could eliminate a future threat.
Two historical examples will illustrate the doctrine of preemption and prevention. In early June 1967, Israeli leaders determined that the numerical superiority of the Arab armed forces, along with Soviet military aid, would in time threaten Israel's existence. The Jewish state's "preventive war" that ensued destroyed the military machines of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. A classic example of "preventive war" is Israel's air strike against Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981. The Israeli leaders claimed that Saddam Hussein would use nuclear weapons to destroy the Jewish state and therefore prevention was justified.
Be the first to comment on this story