The role of warfare in IR: Just war and doctrine of preemption asUnited States Strategy in war on terror

The role of warfare in IR: ʹJust warʹ and doctrine of ʹpreemptionʹ as United States Strategy in war on terror

The global war on terrorism as currently waged is a strategic error. Its stated goals are unrealistic and condemn the United States to a hopeless quest for absolute security. Its strategies are politically, fiscally, and militarily very difficult to sustain and its methods lacks moral justification and contravenes international laws. Containment policy worked with the Soviets for several decades. The Soviet experience holds important lessons for current U.S. foreign policy. 1967 is attestation that first strikes quickly and irrevocably remove diplomatic options off the table. An over-reliance on preemption can lead to the downplaying of diplomacy. Today, the doctrine of preemption has fallen on hard times. Far from demonstrating the principleʹs effectiveness, the Iraq war and its aftermath have ultimately underscored its limits. Preemptive war is not and cannot be just.