Powell
Doctrine
From Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia
The "Powell Doctrine"
is a journalist-created
term, named after General Colin Powell
in the run-up to the 1990-1991 Gulf War.
It is based in large part on the Weinberger Doctrine, devised by Caspar Weinberger, former Secretary of Defense
and Powell's former boss. The doctrine emphasizes U.S. national security
interests.
The
Doctrine
The Powell Doctrine states that a
list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action
is taken by the United States:
- Is a vital national security interest threatened?
- Do we have a clear
attainable objective?
- Have the risks and
costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
- Have all other
non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
- Is there a plausible
exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
- Have the
consequences of our action been fully considered?
- Is the action
supported by the American people?
- Do we have genuine
broad international support?[1]
As Powell said in an April 1, 2009
interview on The Rachel Maddow Show,
the Doctrine denotes the exhausting of all "political, economic, and
diplomatic means," which, only if those means prove to be futile, should a
nation resort to military force. Powell has expanded upon the Doctrine,
asserting that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should
be used to achieve decisive force against the enemy, minimizing US casualties
and ending the conflict quickly by forcing the weaker force to capitulate. This
is well in line with Western military strategy dating at least from Carl von Clausewitz's On War.[citation needed]
Criticisms
Political scientist Robert Farley has
criticized the Powell doctrine on the grounds that it is "an effort by the
uniformed military to restrict the policymaking freedom of civilians".[3]
The entire wiki link on the subject can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine
And there are many more links on this subject, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment