The Bush Doctrine and the Evolution of National Security Strategy Policies
The Bush Doctrine is a common phrase describing diverse principles in the foreign policy. George W. Bush was the 43rd President of the United States of America from 2001 to 2009. Surveys indicated that the Bush Doctrine principle was first applied in 2001 by Charles Krauthammer in describing the administration of Bush after he rejected the Kyoto protocol and ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) treaty or ABMT (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) (Kaufman, 2008).
In my view withdrawing from the ABM and Kyoto protocol was not a wise idea, and proved that Bush had some hidden agendas. ABM was put in place as a treaty between Soviet Union and United States in limiting anti-ballistic missile systems in the defense of regions subject to nuclear weapons that are missile delivered. Soviet Union and the United States were expected to limit to two ABM complexes in both nations, with each compartment containing not more than one hundred ABMs. The agreement had come into force in 1972.
Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty targeting the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), it is in place in binding industrialized nations and developing nations is reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In my view, by president Bush breaking away from the Kyoto Protocol, it meant that he was not environmentally friendly and that he supported pollution of the environment, since the climate system was largely affected by the human interference.
In September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks in New York, the principle Bush Doctrine signaled the foreign policy that asserted that United States had expressive rights of protecting its soil from aggressive terrorism groups; a term that justified the Afghanistan Invasion in 2001. There are different meanings attached to the Bush Doctrine, as the term evolved to mean preventive war policy, spreading diplomacy policy in the globe, combating terrorism strategy and pursuing the interests of the United States (Kaufman, 2008). In my view I support the issues and policies relating with the preventative war policy, diversification of global diplomacy, combating terrorism and on pursuing the interests of America.
Findings indicated that some of the issues and policies in the Bush Doctrine have been incorporated in the National Security Strategy of the United States document that was published in 2002 by the National Security Council (Bush, 2009). Bush Administration members avoided the term ‘Bush Doctrines’ and surveys indicated that Dick Cheney who was the Vice President was the only member of the Bush Administration to have talked of the Bush Doctrine expression in a 2003 speech. Bush Doctrine was categorically against the regime of Sadam Hussein of Iraq and the Taliban in the Afghanistan (Leffler & Legro, 2008).
It has been noted that the National Security Strategy of the United States is slowly replacing the Bush Doctrine. The document asserted that the responsibility of the government of the United States is to protect the interests of the United States and also to protect the American people (Kaufman, 2008). The United States government has the duty of developing counter mechanisms for any arising threats in the country, whether real or anticipated, by engaging the national power; I support the above policy of protecting the interests of the United States and wholly protecting the American people.
Self defense is a right to the American government, although priority is accorded to non military means in finding amicable solutions to conflicts. The two major pillars that supported the Bush Doctrine were advancing on changes in relations to the democratic regime and practicing preemptive strikes that are directed at the actual and potential enemies (Leffler & Legro, 2008). Assertions made by Bush indicated that United States was actively involved and threatened by the global war of ideology. He went further to assert that the enemies of the United States were against democracy and that they hated United States in an equal measure. Enemies of democracy had come together to fight United States.
The National Security Strategy is guided by four main pillars identifying with Military Primacy, Preemption, Spread of Democracy and New Multilateralism (Bush, 2009). Preemption was supported by the fact that United Stated was under constant threat of democracy haters and the nations supporting terrorism. Bush argued that nations harboring terrorists should be held accountable together with the terrorists. United States vowed to fight the enemies both locally and in overseas before the terrorists reached the borders of the United States, United States was committed to confront any forms of threats before the threats came to actualization and that the United States was at hope and liberty in dealing with fear caused by terrorism (Bush, 2009).
In conclusion, Bush Doctrine was considered as a collection of practical policy decisions, strategy principles and ideas that guided the foreign policy of the United States (Leffler & Legro, 2008). Bush Doctrine has since been replaced by the National Security Strategy for the United States, which has borrowed vast issues and policies from the Bush Doctrine. United States support Unilateralism, attacking nations that harbor terrorists, engaging pre-emptive strikes and in encouraging changes in the democratic regime (Bush, 2009).
References
Bush, G. W. (2009). The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Burlington, Massachusetts: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Kaufman, R. G. (2008). In Defense of the Bush Doctrine. Lexington, Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky.
Leffler, M. & Legro, J. (2008). To Lead the World: American Strategy after the Bush Doctrine. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
