The Bush Doctrine is a set of ideas relating to US foreign policy, including the right to declare preemptive war. It was formulated after 9/11 and codified in the United States National Security Strategy. It includes the idea of preemptive military action and is often at odds with the Reagan Doctrine.
The Bush Doctrine is a term used to describe a set of ideas relating to United States foreign policy. It was originally used to denote the idea that a state harboring terrorists could be treated in the same way as terrorists themselves. It later expanded to include other implied rights the United States had in the global arena, including the highly controversial right to declare preemptive war.
The term Bush Doctrine was used early in President Bush’s first term. As early as February 2001, it was being used to refer to what was seen as a move by President Bush toward unilateralism. This was marked by Bush withdrawing the United States from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.
The core of the first Bush Doctrine, however, was formulated in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The famous President Bush announced: “We will not distinguish between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” In this declaration of the Bush Doctrine, the president cleared the way for the invasion of Afghanistan, despite the fact that Afghanistan’s state apparatus had not actually attacked the United States.
The Bush Doctrine in this context was later used as a way to justify US involvement in parts of northwestern Pakistan. Although Pakistan itself is a US ally, Al Qaeda was using this remote region as a training ground for militants whom the US feared would take violent action against its own interests.
A year after the Bush Doctrine was first formally presented, it was codified in a document titled United States National Security Strategy. Four years later, in 2006, the document was updated to reflect changes and refinements in US foreign policy. The current text, which can largely be considered the definitive statement of the Bush Doctrine, reads:
“It is an enduring American principle that this duty obliges government to anticipate and counter threats, using all elements of national power, before threats can cause serious harm. The greater the threat, the greater the risk of inertia – and the more compelling it is to take preemptive action to defend ourselves, even as uncertainty remains as to when and where the enemy will attack. There are few threats greater than a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction. To prevent or forestall such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively in exercising our inherent right to self-defense.”
This new formulation of the Bush Doctrine can also be seen to include the idea of preemptive military action. Saying “before threats can do serious damage” opens the door to taking military action against interests before they have attacked the United States. This is a relatively new concept in modern warfare, where traditionally one side attacks another nation unprovoked and is seen as largely unjust, and that nation can then justly retaliate.
The Bush Doctrine is often at odds with the Reagan Doctrine. The Reagan Doctrine pushed for what was often referred to as political realism and included a movement toward decreasing spending in the defense arena. While Reagan desired a strong military and defensive strategy, he also spoke strongly in terms of the peace dividend, moving away from military spending. Neoconservatives of the time strongly opposed the Reagan Doctrine and were strong architects and supporters of the Bush Doctrine.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
