By Stanley A. Renshon
The Bush Doctrine is lifeless! a minimum of that’s what critics wish. yet whereas new U.S. nationwide defense demanding situations emerge, many post-9/11 threats nonetheless persist and the rules of George W. Bush supply one set of strategic solutions for a way President Obama can confront these hazards. Neither a polemic nor a whitewash, this e-book offers a cautious research of the Bush Doctrine—its improvement, program, and rationale—and assesses its legacy: How will Obama reply to the numerous overseas coverage demanding situations that watch for him?
Through an exam of psychology up to coverage, Renshon offers us the 1st comparative research of the Bush Doctrine and the constructing Obama Doctrine. The booklet analyzes the diversity of nationwide safety concerns Obama will face and the political divisions that permeate U.S. nationwide defense debates. it truly is crucial analyzing for a person seeking to know how presidents investigate safeguard hazards ordinarily and the way Obama in particular is probably going to conform the Bush Doctrine to his personal worldview.
Read or Download National Security in the Obama Administration: Reassessing the Bush Doctrine PDF
Similar political freedom books
Is terrorism ever morally justified? How may still ancient and cultural elements be taken under consideration in judging the morality of terrorist acts? What are the moral limits of kingdom counter-terrorism? for 3 many years the Provisional Irish Republican military waged an 'armed fight' opposed to what it thought of to be the British career of Northern eire.
Arguing that the ideology of freedom and equality at the present time bears little resemblance to its eighteenth-century counterpart, Richard Stivers examines how those values were significantly remodeled in a technological civilization. as soon as considered a type of own estate and a side of the consideration of the person, the context of freedom and equality this present day is technological sooner than it really is political and financial and is usually now mostly considered in collective phrases.
Rogue states pursue guns of mass destruction, help terrorism, violate human rights, interact in acts of territorial aggression, and pose a danger to the overseas group. contemporary debates and coverage shifts concerning Iraq, North Korea, Syria, Iran, and Afghanistan replicate the asymmetric makes an attempt to cope with regimes that pursue deviant habit.
A decade and a 1/2 onerous wars, punishing monetary setbacks, and fast-rising competitors has known as into query America's primary place and goal in international politics. Will the united states remain the single superpower within the foreign approach? should still it proceed advancing the world-shaping grand procedure it has because the sunrise of the chilly battle?
- The Muslim Brotherhood: The Organization and Policies of a Global Islamist Movement (The Middle East in Focus)
- Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Program Assessment
- Would-be warriors: incidents of jihadist terrorist radicalization in the United States since September 11, 2001
- Foucault and Politics: A Critical Introduction
- Freedom: A Philosophical Anthology
Extra resources for National Security in the Obama Administration: Reassessing the Bush Doctrine
But our The Obama Presidency 15 pressing on those issues can’t interfere with dialogue on other crucial topics” she captured and embodied a realist perspective. In that stance there are both advantages and risks. The most obvious risk is that the Chinese or others will take our “realism” as a signal that they needn’t make any accommodations, domestically or internationally, on these matters. A more serious general risk of realism as a policy of limits arises in the case of the new Obama Administration-recommended emphasis on limited counterinsurgency goals in Afghanistan,84 rather than on democratic governance and nation building.
What kinds of threats are involved? ”93 President Obama seems to agree. In his ﬁrst presidential debate with John McCain he said, “the biggest threat to the United States is a terrorist getting their hands on nuclear weapons,” and further “the biggest threat that we face right now is not a nuclear missile coming over the skies. ”94 So if multiple and independent assessments by American intelligence agencies are credible, there is no evidence that the post-9/11 world and the basic security dilemmas that it brought for the United States and its allies have changed in any fundamental way.
It is hardly surprising that critics on the left would ﬁnd much to disparage in the Doctrine. They recoil from its muscularity, assertiveness, willingness to act forcefully and if necessarily militarily on behalf of American national interest as the administration conceived it after 9/11, unwillingness to accede to allies’ wishes or international community protest, as well as a willingness to lean, hard if necessary, on those reluctant to support us. More surprising, perhaps, is the decline of conservative support for the Doctrine.