Image via Wikipedia
He then brought up the Powell Doctrine (shelved for years over the Bush Doctrine), which “offers a promising framework for military intervention” and why it should be considered in connection with Washington’s interest-based policy approach. With the President scheduled to deliver the much anticipated “way-forward” in Afghanistan, I think it would be interesting to revisit the Powell Doctrine. The following excerpted from Mr. Wolf’s paper:
[T]he Powell Doctrine begins with the interest-based decision to intervene and formulates an operational catalogue of criteria for the “proper” execution of military intervention. Accordingly, the military should only be put to use when:
(1) The national interest requires it;
(2) The number of troops employed corresponds with the mission they are to execute;
(3) The mission is clearly defined, both politically and militarily;
(4) The size, composition, and disposition of the troops is constantly being reevaluated; (5) The operation has the support of both the Congress and the American people; and
(6) There is a clear exit strategy.
He further writes that “the operational criteria to be fulfilled according to the Powell Doctrine are meant to set up barriers to the ill-considered commitment of military forces in poorly planned operations and to help prevent “mission creep,” the unplanned escalation of a conflict.” He cited as primary example of a military intervention carried out in accordance with the Powell Doctrine, the US-led Operation Desert Storm, conducted under UN auspices for the liberation of Kuwait in 1991.”
Related Item: Alexander Wolf | U.S. Interventions Abroad: A Renaissance of the Powell Doctrine? Strategic Studies Quarterly | Winter 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment