DOCSLIB.ORG

Continuation in US Foreign Policy: an Offensive Realist Perspective Bledar Prifti University of South Florida, [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Continuation in US Foreign Policy: an Offensive Realist Perspective Bledar Prifti University of South Florida, Bprifti@Mail.Usf.Edu University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 10-20-2014 Continuation in US Foreign Policy: An Offensive Realist Perspective Bledar Prifti University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Politics Commons, and the International Relations Commons Scholar Commons Citation Prifti, Bledar, "Continuation in US Foreign Policy: An Offensive Realist Perspective" (2014). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/5384 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Continuity in US Foreign Policy: An Offensive Realist Perspective by Bledar Prifti A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Government and International Affairs College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Chair: Linda Lucas, Ph.D. Major Professor: Earl Conteh-Morgan, Ph.D. Abdelwahab Hechiche, Ph.D. Pratyusha Basu, Ph.D. Bernd Reiter, Ph.D. Date of Approval: October 20, 2014 Keywords: regional hegemony, offshore balancer, power maximization, ISIL, survival Copyright © 2014, Bledar Prifti Dedication To my wife, Suela, for all she had to endure while I was writing this dissertation To my son, Joel, for bringing joy in my life, faith in myself, and power in my soul Acknowledgments While I’m responsible for the entire content of this dissertation, I’m also proud to acknowledge the unsurmountable help of a group of exceptional scholars who assisted me throughout the process of writing this work. First and foremost, I thank Professor Earl Conteh-Morgan, my Major Professor, for all the exceptional hard work and dedication he put in guiding me toward success. It was a privilege and honor for me to have had the opportunity to work closely with such a great academic and human being. Second, I want to thank from the bottom of my heart Professor Abdelwahab Hechiche for all his unconditional support throughout my career as a graduate student at USF. From him I learned that no matter how much we learn in life, at the end we all remain students. In addition, I want to express my sincere and immense gratitude to Professor Pratyusha Basu, whose ideas and suggestions made a substantial contribution to the quality of this dissertation. Finally, I acknowledge with high respect and humility the important role of Dr. Bernd Reiter in the process of writing and defending this dissertation. I believe that he is an asset to everyone in the GIA department and an inspirational figure for all those who want to succeed in the academic life. I conclude by saying again that is has been my great pleasure, privilege, and honor to have worked with each one of you. I wish you all the best in your families and academic lives. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures iii Abstract iv Chapter One: Introduction 1 Introduction 1 Foreign Policy Variables and Levels of Analysis 5 Research Questions and Units of Analysis 8 Establishing a Theoretical Framework: Offensive Realism 10 Research Design 14 Data Collection 17 Academic Contribution 18 Dissertation Roadmap 19 Chapter Two: Foreign Policy—International Relations Nexus 21 Introduction 21 Individual-level Analysis 24 State-level Analysis 28 International-level Analysis 33 Chapter Three: The Theoretical Framework: Offensive Realism 39 Introduction 39 Offshore Balancing and Power Projection 48 Theoretical Propositions 49 Why Offensive Realism? 50 Chapter Four: Research Methodology 53 Congruence Method 57 Methodological Strengths and Weaknesses 58 Chapter Five: Revisiting the 2003 Iraq War 63 Offensive Realism and the 2003 Iraq War 65 Conclusion 82 Chapter Six: The Bush Doctrine: Continuity or Change in US Foreign Policy 84 Introduction 84 Roosevelt Corollary: Maintaining Hegemony with a Big Stick 88 i The Truman Doctrine: War on Communism 99 The Carter Doctrine: “Spreading Democracy” in the Middle East 106 The Reagan Doctrine: Dealing with the Rogue Empire 112 Conclusion 117 Chapter Seven: Breaking the Taboo About Iran-US Relations 122 Introduction 122 US Foreign Policy: Fearing Iran 126 The Rational Iran 128 Iran and the US: Sharing Mutual Strategic Interests 141 Conclusion 149 Chapter Eight: Conclusion and Policy Implications 151 How Does the Real Obama Doctrine Look Like? 155 Dealing with Russia and China 156 References 159 ii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Diagram of Buck-Passing Strategy 46 Figure 2: Diagram of Balancing Strategy 47 Figure 3: Areas of Responsibility 49 Figure 4: Factors that Led to Aggressive Behavior 69 Figure 5: The Map of Iraq 73 Figure 6: USCENTCOM Area of Responsibility 116 Figure 7: The Map of Iran 124 iii ABSTRACT This dissertation is a study of US foreign policy that aims at maintaining its regional hegemonic status and preventing the emergence of another regional hegemon by implementing the offshore balancing strategy. US intervention during the 2003 Iraq War, strained US-Iran relationship, and the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in early 2014 compel a reevaluation of US foreign policy. Two major claims of this dissertation include: (1) US foreign policy is consistent with offensive realist theoretical claims; and (2) US foreign policy is characterized by continuity when it comes to issues related to America’s strategic interests. Utilizing a case study and comparative case study methodology, this dissertation outlines the following findings. The first finding of this dissertation is that US foreign policy actions under the Bush Doctrine, which led to the 2003 Iraq War, were dictated by the anarchic status of the international system, the possession by Iraq of military capabilities that could harm or destroy America, fear from and suspicion of Iraq’s intentions, the need to ensure survival in an anarchic system, and the need to maximize relative power vis-à-vis other states. All these factors led to three main pattern of behavior: fear, self-help, and power maximization. Because there was no other regional great power capable and willing to balance Iraq, the US was forced to rely on direct balancing by threatening Iraq to take military actions, creating an anti-Iraqi alliance, and maximizing its relative power by destroying Iraq’s military capabilities. Second, US foreign policy under the Bush Doctrine was a continuation of the 20th century foreign policy. US foreign policy during the 20th century was dictated by three major patterns of iv behavior: fear, self-help, and power maximization. In realizing its foreign policy goals, the US had to rely on buck-passing and balancing strategies. Whenever there was no regional great power able and willing “to carry the buck”, the US would rely on direct balancing by either threatening the aggressor, creating alliances with other regional states, or utilizing additional resources of its own. Four major presidential doctrines and related occurrences were utilized to test the claim: the Roosevelt Corollary, the Truman Doctrine, the Carter Doctrine, and the Reagan Doctrine. The last finding of this dissertation is that US foreign policy toward Iran constitutes continuity and is dictated by US need to maintain regional hegemony by acting as an offshore balancer. In addition, the US and Iran share mutual strategic interests in several occasions, and a strategic win or loss for one state is a win or loss for the other. Like that of the US, Iran’s foreign policy is guided by rationality. The Iran-Contra affair, the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, and the Russia-Chechnya conflict support the claim that Iran’s foreign policy is based on rationality instead of religious ideology as argued by many scholars. Also, the 2001 Afghanistan war, the 2003 Iraq war, and the establishment of the ISIL support the claim that the US and Iran share mutual strategic interests. Cooperation is often desirable and in some cases inevitable. Despite this strong claim, US-Iran relationship has its own limitations because neither the US nor Iran would accept a too powerful other that could establish absolute dominance in the region. v CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Foreign policy is defined as strategies pursued by states to achieve their international goals while statecraft is the way how states implement foreign policy (Rourke and Boyer 2010, 141). Foreign policy can be expressed through actions and decisions. Foreign policy actions represent what states actually do to achieve their international goals while foreign policy decisions represent initiatives that do not always translate into real actions and are sometimes used to deceive or conceal the true decisions or goals of a state (Hudson 2013, 5). Explaining the foreign policy of a state is a fairly daunting task not only because decisions and actions of a state often do not match but also because there exist a plethora of theoretical approaches that focus on particular facts, factors, or variables and look at foreign policy from different perspectives. At the same time, explaining foreign policy is like seductive puzzle, the more you get into it the more attractive it becomes, even though at times it may be challenging. This is the case especially with U.S. foreign policy, the foreign policy of the most powerful country on earth. The recent developments, including the 2003 Iraq war, US-Iran controversial relationship, and the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) provide significant incentives to reexamine US foreign policy in order to have a better understanding of its role and status in the international system. This dissertation is a case of continuity in US foreign policy, which aims at maintaining US regional hegemony, expanding its influence when possible, and preventing the emergence of 1 another regional hegemon by implementing the offshore balancing strategy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Typologies of Realism
    Chinese Journal of International Politics, Vol. 1, 2006, 109–134 doi:10.1093/cjip/pol006 The Typologies of Realism Liu Feng* and Zhang Ruizhuang Much more than a single theory, realism is a school of thought containing numerous related branches. In recent years an outpour of debate and exchange within the realist tradition has captured the attention of scholars. Many scholars have attempted to create schemes classifying the different branches and threads of realist thought that have emerged, while others have introduced a wealth of new terminology. Unfortunately, as a result of these Downloaded from efforts, realist concepts have become obfuscated, resulting in much confusion, and ultimately erecting a barrier to intellectual progress in the field. The goal of this article is to help remove this barrier by clarifying the criteria for classifying different approaches to realist thought and presenting a more coherent classification scheme that will enhance the understanding of the http://cjip.oxfordjournals.org/ relationship between various strands of realist thought. The Debate Regarding the Classification of Types of Realism Since the 1980s, a number of new schools of thought, including by guest on May 28, 2014 constructivism, critical theory and post-modernism, have critiqued, and ultimately come to challenge, traditional schools of international relations theory such as realism and liberalism. Yet, as a result of sharp differences with respect to ontology, epistemology and methodology, exchange between these new schools and the more traditional mainstream schools have been quite limited. In stark contrast with this dearth of scholarly exchange across schools of thought, the intellectual debate and exchange of ideas within the realist school have flowered, giving birth to many new branches and sub-branches of realist thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Waltz's Theory of Theory
    WALTZ’S THEORY OF THEORY 201 Waltz’s Theory of Theory Ole Wæver Abstract Waltz’s 1979 book, Theory of International Politics, is the most infl uential in the history of the discipline. It worked its effects to a large extent through raising the bar for what counted as theoretical work, in effect reshaping not only realism but rivals like liberalism and refl ectivism. Yet, ironically, there has been little attention paid to Waltz’s very explicit and original arguments about the nature of theory. This article explores and explicates Waltz’s theory of theory. Central attention is paid to his defi nition of theory as ‘a picture, mentally formed’ and to the radical anti-empiricism and anti-positivism of his position. Followers and critics alike have treated Waltzian neorealism as if it was at bottom a formal proposition about cause–effect relations. The extreme case of Waltz being so victorious in the discipline, and yet being so consistently misinterpreted on the question of theory, shows the power of a dominant philosophy of science in US IR, and thus the challenge facing any ambitious theorising. The article suggests a possible movement of fronts away from the ‘fourth debate’ between rationalism and refl ectivism towards one of theory against empiricism. To help this new agenda, the article introduces a key literature from the philosophy of science about the structure of theory, and particularly about the way even natural science uses theory very differently from the way IR’s mainstream thinks it does – and much more like the way Waltz wants his theory to be used.
    [Show full text]
  • Realism As Tragedy Reviewed Work(S): the Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John J
    Review: Realism as Tragedy Reviewed Work(s): The Tragedy of Great Power Politics by John J. Mearsheimer Review by: Brian C. Schmidt Source: Review of International Studies, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Jul., 2004), pp. 427-441 Published by: Cambridge University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20097926 Accessed: 31-10-2017 23:07 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review of International Studies This content downloaded from 86.133.137.245 on Tue, 31 Oct 2017 23:07:43 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Review of International Studies (2004), 30, 427-441 Copyright ? British International Studies Association DOI: 10.1017IS0260210504006151 Realism as tragedy BRIAN C. SCHMIDT* John J. Mearsheimer, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (New York: W.W. Norton, 2001). In short, the real world remains a realist world.1 In 1948, Hans J. Morgenthau wrote his classic text, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, that was largely responsible for establishing realism as the prevailing theory in the field of International Relations (IR).2 In 1979, Kenneth N Waltz wrote an immensely influential book, Theory of International Politics, that resulted in a new structural version of realism - neorealism - becoming the dominant theory in IR.3 John J.
    [Show full text]
  • John J. Mearsheimer: an Offensive Realist Between Geopolitics and Power
    John J. Mearsheimer: an offensive realist between geopolitics and power Peter Toft Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Østerfarimagsgade 5, DK 1019 Copenhagen K, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] With a number of controversial publications behind him and not least his book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, John J. Mearsheimer has firmly established himself as one of the leading contributors to the realist tradition in the study of international relations since Kenneth Waltz’s Theory of International Politics. Mearsheimer’s main innovation is his theory of ‘offensive realism’ that seeks to re-formulate Kenneth Waltz’s structural realist theory to explain from a struc- tural point of departure the sheer amount of international aggression, which may be hard to reconcile with Waltz’s more defensive realism. In this article, I focus on whether Mearsheimer succeeds in this endeavour. I argue that, despite certain weaknesses, Mearsheimer’s theoretical and empirical work represents an important addition to Waltz’s theory. Mearsheimer’s workis remarkablyclear and consistent and provides compelling answers to why, tragically, aggressive state strategies are a rational answer to life in the international system. Furthermore, Mearsheimer makes important additions to structural alliance theory and offers new important insights into the role of power and geography in world politics. Journal of International Relations and Development (2005) 8, 381–408. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800065 Keywords: great power politics; international security; John J. Mearsheimer; offensive realism; realism; security studies Introduction Dangerous security competition will inevitably re-emerge in post-Cold War Europe and Asia.1 International institutions cannot produce peace.
    [Show full text]
  • POLS 3960: U.S. Strategy in Asia, Spring 2016 Syllabus (PDF)
    POLS 3960 U.S. Strategy in Asia Spring 2016, MWF 12:00-12:50 Classroom: Brouster Hall 040 Professor Nori Katagiri Email: [email protected] Office: McGannon 127 Phone: 977-3044 Office hours: MW 1400-1500 or by appointment Course Description and Objectives: This course is designed to explore various parts of East Asia and American strategy to deal with issues we face in the region. The countries we examine primarily include those in Northeast Asia, China, and Southeast Asia. We will discuss the nature of relationship the United States maintains with countries in East Asia and our strategic options mostly in the post-Cold War era. In so doing, we will explore what political ends the country has in Asia and what strategy there is to pursue them. In this course, we seek to explore the past, present, and future of East Asian politics, economy, and security gain familiarity with the theoretical literature on US interests in East Asia analyze the nature of US relationship with East Asia understand the role of power, resources, and ideas in the formation and application of national and regional interests investigate a set of strategic options for the United States, and hone critical thinking on political events taking place in East Asia The course is divided into four sections: (1) the past and present (2) American strategy, (3) Northeast Asia and China, and (4) Southeast and South Asia. First, we examine the background of our interests in the region. Second, we explore our strategic choices in East Asia. Third, we discuss strategic options we have in China and Northeast Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Foreign Policy Doctrines
    20 July 2015 Presidential Doctrines, the Use of Force and International Order Did the US’ military and legal reactions to the 9/11 attacks fundamentally transform its foreign and security policies? Joseph Siracusa doesn’t think so. He argues that the so-called Bush and Obama Doctrines have had more in common with previous presidential approaches than most people realize. By Joseph Siracusa for ISN In the ever-changing landscape of international relations, the extent to which the actions of the United States contribute to justice and order remains a source of contentious debate. Indeed, it is difficult to find a point in recent history when the United States and its foreign policy have been subject to such polarised and acrimonious reflection, both domestically and internationally. Notwithstanding recent ‘decline’ debates and the rise of emerging powers, the United States continues to hold a formidable advantage over its chief rivals in terms of formal power assets more than twenty-five years after the end of the Cold War. Few anticipated this situation; on the contrary, many assumed that, after a brief moment of unipolarity following the collapse of the Soviet Union, international affairs would soon regain a certain symmetry. Instead, US hegemony is still par for the course. In this context, because the foreign policy ‘doctrines’ of American presidents remain an important driver of the outlook of the United States, these doctrines continue to play a significant role in shaping international order. Though they have veered from isolationist to interventionist to expansionist over the years, these doctrines in fact exhibit a remarkable continuity – even in the post 9/11 era.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Shifts in Power and Geopolitical Regionalization
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Scholvin, Sören Working Paper Emerging Non-OECD Countries: Global Shifts in Power and Geopolitical Regionalization GIGA Working Papers, No. 128 Provided in Cooperation with: GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies Suggested Citation: Scholvin, Sören (2010) : Emerging Non-OECD Countries: Global Shifts in Power and Geopolitical Regionalization, GIGA Working Papers, No. 128, German Institute of Global and Area Studies (GIGA), Hamburg This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/47796 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Inclusion of a paper in the Working Papers series does not constitute publication and should not limit publication in any other venue.
    [Show full text]
  • INRL 5008 Methodology and Theory of International Relations
    INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES ST. AUGUSTINE CAMPUS REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Postgraduate Diploma in International Relations INRL 5008 Methodology and Theory of International Relations Dr. Nand C. Bardouille [email protected] SEMESTER I ACADEMIC YEAR 2020 – 2021 1 INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (IIR) THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES, ST. AUGUSTINE Methodology and Theory of International Relations Postgraduate Diploma Course INRL 5008 Dr. Nand C. Bardouille Email: [email protected] Office hours online: Wednesday 5pm–6pm and Thursday 5pm–6pm or by appointment Class times online: Tuesdays 5pm – 8pm (5pm–6:30pm; 6:30pm–7:00pm; 7:00pm–7:45pm) Mode of Delivery This course will be delivered online, leveraging zoom teleconference, online activities and assignments. Description The purpose of this course is to introduce students to the conceptualization, understanding and application of theory in International Relations (IR). The course begins with a brief introduction on the approaches to analysis within the discipline, ontology and epistemology, methodology and so on. This prepares students, firstly, for the discussion note and later the main coursework essay, which invites them to reflect on issues of what constitutes IR and how to ' do' the discipline. Secondly, it gives students the necessary grounding with which to examine, understand and analyse the varied theoretical approaches which are addressed within the course. They include classical theories like idealism and realism. This forms the basis for consideration of mainstream IR theory, having an eye to structural realism, liberalism, neoliberal institutionalism and cosmopolitanism, and the so-called 'neo-neo' debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Balance of Power
    BALANCE OF POWER BALANCE OF POWER Theory and Practice in the 21st Century Edited by T. V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann Stanford University Press, Stanford, California 2004 Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 2004 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of Stanford University Press. Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, archival-quality paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Balance of power : theory and practice in the 21st century / edited by T.V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Fortmann. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8047-5016-5 (cloth : alk. paper)—ISBN 0-8047-5017-3 (pbk : alk. paper) 1. Balance of power. 2. International relations. I. Paul, T.V. II. Wirtz, James J., 1958– III. Fortmann, Michel. JZ1313.B35 2004 327.1'01—dc22 2004011433 Designed by Janet Wood Typeset by BookMatters in 11/14 Garamond Original Printing 2004 Last figure below indicates year of this printing: 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 Contents List of Tables vii Acknowledgments ix About the Editors and Contributors xi Introduction: The Enduring Axioms of Balance of Power Theory and Their Contemporary Relevance T. V. Paul 1 Part I: Theories of Balance of Power and Major Powers 1. What Do Great Powers Balance Against and When? 29 Jack S.
    [Show full text]
  • Scarce Differences: Toward a Material and Systemic Foundation for Offensive and Defensive Realism
    Security Studies, 22:436–465, 2013 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0963-6412 print / 1556-1852 online DOI: 10.1080/09636412.2013.816125 Scarce Differences: Toward a Material and Systemic Foundation for Offensive and Defensive Realism ERIC J. HAMILTON AND BRIAN C. RATHBUN A divide has opened up between offensive and defensive realism as to the relative scarcity of security in the international system, with powerful implications for the vision each approach offers about the nature of international politics. Yet we still do not understand why the two diverge given their common neorealist foundations. This article reviews implicit, explicit, and other potential explanations of that difference—the relationship between power and security, the offense-defense balance, the prevalence and efficiency of balancing vs. bandwagoning, and the role played by uncertainty in decision- making—and finds them lacking in their ability to provide an adequate account that is systemic and structural in nature, does not violate arguments the scholars have made in practice, and does not confuse cause with effect. Finding prior efforts lacking, this article proposes that the distinction could be logically rooted in material scarcity, a familiar theme in realism historically that has been ignored in more recent formulations. Drawing a distinction between a “dangerous world” in which uncertainty is the core problem and a “competitive world” in which scarcity bedevils state relations helps explain where offensive and defensive realism both diverge and converge. Eric J. Hamilton is a PhD candidate in the Politics and International Relations Program at the University of Southern California. Brian C. Rathbun is an associate professor at the University of Southern California.
    [Show full text]
  • Soft Balancing Against the United States Soft Balancing Against Robert A
    Soft Balancing against the United States Soft Balancing against Robert A. Pape the United States President George W. Bush and his administration are pursuing a profoundly new U.S. national se- curity strategy. Since January 2001 the United States has unilaterally aban- doned the Kyoto accords on global warming, rejected participation in the International Criminal Court, and withdrawn from the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) treaty, among other unilateralist foreign policies. Although the United States gained considerable international sympathy following the terrorist at- tacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration chose to conduct military operations against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan with the aid of only one country: Great Britain.1 In 2002 the administration announced that it would re- place the Baathist regime in Iraq, a country that posed no observable threat to attack the United States, and to do so with military force “unilaterally if neces- sary.”2 The United States went on to conquer Iraq in early 2003 despite vigor- ous efforts by many of the world’s major powers to delay, frustrate, and even undermine war plans and reduce the number of countries that would ªght alongside the United States. Since then, the United States has threatened Iran and Syria, reafªrmed its commitment to build an ambitious ballistic missile defense system, and taken few steps to mend fences with the international community. The Bush strategy is one of the most aggressively unilateral U.S. national se- curity strategies ever, and it is likely to produce important international conse- quences. So far, the debate has focused almost exclusively on the immediate Robert A.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY of AMERICA the Christian, The
    THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace A DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Theology and Religious Studies Of The Catholic University of America In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Doctor of Philosophy © Copyright All Rights Reserved By Tapani Kristian Saarinen Washington, D.C. 2016 The Christian, the Church, and Causes of War: A Systematic Analysis of the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Call to Just Peace Tapani Saarinen, Ph.D. Director: Michael Root, Ph.D. The World Council of Churches’ (WCC) Decade to Overcome Violence between 2001-2010 included theological reflection and work to overcome all violence. The results can be read in a document called Ecumenical Call to Just Peace (ECJP). ECJP presents a call to overcome violence and establish Just Peace in four distinct contexts: community, ecology, economy and international politics. As causes of violence differ depending on context, however, can such a holistic approach provide a workable solution for various contexts and their specific challenges? My study focuses on the possible contributions of ECJP’s teaching for the states as actors in international politics. The purpose of my study is to analyze and assess ECJP from the perspective of the causes of war, especially as such causes have been investigated by realist theories of international relations (IR). I transfer the IR approach which unites work for peace and analysis of the causes of war to the study of ecumenical teaching in ECJP.
    [Show full text]