Article
Global debate and the limits of the Bush Doctrine.
International Studies Perspectives
(2003)
Abstract
The “Bush Doctrine” asserting the right to preemptively attack states that support or harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass destruction (WMD) has bitterly divided world opinion. Many seemingly long-settled questions of international politics, especially involving the unilateral use of force, have been reopened. Although we are concerned about the implications of the Bush Doctrine, we do not agree that it fundamentally changes world politics as some have asserted. Instead, we argue that the global debate leading up to the war in Iraq signals widespread support for existing international norms. Most states continue to see force as a last resort, properly subject to multilateral control in all but the most urgent cases of imminent self-defense. The nature of American diplomatic maneuverings in the United Nations and the public statements of high-level officials suggest that even the United States continues to recognize the importance of these norms.
Keywords
- Weapons of Mass Destruction,
- International norms,
- Bush Doctrine,
- preventive war,
- U.S. foreign policy
Disciplines
Publication Date
November, 2003
Citation Information
Peter Dombrowski and Rodger A Payne. "Global debate and the limits of the Bush Doctrine." International Studies Perspectives Vol. 4 Iss. 4 (2003) p. 395 - 408 ISSN: 1528-3585 Available at: http://works.bepress.com/rodger-payne/10/