Abstract
This chapter will argue that the strategy of prevention/preemption, which was stipulated in the Bush doctrine and continued to a large extent in the counterterrorism measures employed by the Obama administration, did not necessarily signify an unparalleled innovation in US national security policy. Preemption/prevention considerations have been an unequivocal element of US counterproliferation policy since the end of the Cold War. Indeed, it is evident that the core theoretical thrust underpinning the Bush doctrine, and specifically, the preventive motivation for war, has long been an intrinsic part of the strategic thought of policymakers, officials and military planners at the highest levels of the US government. While it has often been depicted as a distinct and markedly new national security strategy, the Bush doctrine was, in fact, neither new nor era defining. As Peter Lavoy argues, the Bush administration’s “new” strategy read much like “old wine in a new bottle” and hardly represented the fundamental policy shift that many portend.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Peter Lavoy, “What’s New in the New US Strategy to Combat WMD?,” Strategic Insights, 1, no. 10 (2002): 14–27.
US Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States. 1946–1954 (Washington, DC: US Department of State, 1946): 1201.
James B. Steinberg, Michael E. O’Hanlon, and Susan E. Rice, “The New National Security Strategy and Pre-emption,” Brookings Policy Brief Series, 2002, http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2002/12/terrorism-ohanlon; and Abraham D. Solaer, “On the Necessity of Pre-Emption,” European Journal of International Law, 14, no. 2 (2003): 209–210.
W. Hays Parks, “Memorandum of Law: Executive Order 12333 and Assassination,” The Army Lawyer, no. 12 (1989): 7.
See Les Aspin, “Les Aspin’s Remarks to the National Academy of Science on 7 December 1993,” Comparative Strategy, 13, no. 2 (1994): 239–244.
For the recollections of senior Kennedy administration officials of events during the crisis, see, Arthur M. Schlesinger, A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1965): 794–841
Theodore C. Sorensen, Kennedy, ed. John F. Kennedy (New York: Harper & Row, 1965): 667–718
Robert F. Kennedy, Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile Crisis (New York: New American Library, 1969).
For academic analyses of the crisis see, Irving Lester Janis, Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1972): 132–158
Abram Chayes, The Cuban Missile Crisis, International Crises and the Role of Law (London: Oxford University Press, 1974)
Alexander L. George and Richard Smoke, Deterrence in American Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974): 447–499
Graham T. Allison and Philip D. Zelikow, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis, 2nd. ed. (New York: Longman, 1999).
For a selection of declassified American, Cuban, and Soviet documents generated during the crisis, see, Laurence Chang and Peter Kornbluh (eds.), The Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962: A National Security Archive Documents Reader, rev. ed. (New York: The New Press, 1998). Treasury Secretary Douglas Dillon spoke at various times of a hybrid option involving an initial blockade with follow-up air strikes if the Soviets continued construction of the launch sites. See, Ibid.
Leonard C. Meeker, “Defensive Quarantine and the Law,” The American Journal of International Law, 57, no. 3 (1963): 523–524.
Quoted in David John Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law, 5th ed. (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1998): 900–901 However, this rationale neglects to mention the Article 53(1) requirement for UN Security Council authorization of regional enforcement action.
Tad Szulc, Fidel: A Critical Portrait (London: Hutchinson, 1987): 586–587.
Michael E. O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki, Crisis on the Korean Peninsula: How to Deal with a Nuclear North Korea (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003): 23.
Joel S. Wit, Daniel B. Poneman, and Robert L. Gallucci, Going Critical: The Tirst North Korean Nuclear Crisis (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2004): 390.
William Burr and Jeffrey T. Richelson, “Whether to ‘Strangle the Baby in the Cradle:’ The United States and the Chinese Nuclear Program, 1960–64,” International Security, 25, no. 3 (January 2000): 62.
For discussions of this crisis in US-DPRK relations, see, William E. Perry Jr., “North Korea’s Nuclear Program: The Clinton Administration’s Response” (Institute for National Security Studies, US Air Force Academy Colorado, March 1995)
Don Oberdorfer, The Two Koreas: A Contemporary History (London: Warner Books, 1999): 305–336; and Wit, Poneman, and Gallucci, Going Critical.
Francis A. Boyle, “Military Responses to Terrorism: Remarks,” American Society of International Law Proceedings, 81 (1987): 292–293.
Ryan C. Hendrickson, The Clinton Wars: The Constitution, Congress, and War Powers, 1st ed. (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2002): 138.
Tom Ruys, “Armed Attack” and Article 51 of the UN Charter: Evolutions in Customary Law and Practice, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010): 293.
Mary Ellen O’Connell, “Evidence of Terror,” Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 7, no. 1 (1 April 2002): 26.
Marc Trachtenberg, “Preventive War and U.S. Foreign Policy,” Security Studies, 16, no. 1 (2007): 29.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Aiden Warren and Ingvild Bode
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Warren, A., Bode, I. (2014). Preventive and Preemptive Self-Defense in US National Security Policy: A Brief History. In: Governing the Use-of-Force in International Relations. New Security Challenges Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137411440_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137411440_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-48925-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-41144-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Intern. Relations & Development CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)