Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T17:58:30.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Self-Defense in an Imperfect World

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2012

Chris Brown
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In his address at West Point on June 1, 2002, President George W. Bush appeared to be signaling America's willingness to regard the mere possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by potential enemies as grounds for an anticipatory war. Historically, however, a clear distinction has been drawn between preemptive and preventive, or anticipatory, war, with the latter regarded as illegitimate. The National Security Strategy announced by the president on September 20, 2002, was more conventional in its approach to preemption, but doubts remain as to whether the old distinction can be preserved. And this discussion is taking place in the context of a specific problem, namely the apparent desire of Iraq to obtain WMD and the determination of the United States, and, less clearly expressed, the UN Security Council, to prevent this from happening.

Type
Articles
Information
Ethics & International Affairs , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 2 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 “Remarks by the President at the 2002 Graduation Exercise of the United States Military Academy,” June 1, 2002; available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020601-3.html.

2 “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America September 2002”; available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf.

3 Walzer, Michael, Just and Unjust Wars, 2nd ed. (New York: Basic Books, 1992Google Scholar), presents this distinction with great clarity.

4 See Hendrickson, David C., “Towards Universal Empire: The Dangerous Quest for Absolute Security,” World Policy Journal (Fall 2002), pp. 1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 For a judicious recent discussion, see Oren, Michael, Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002Google Scholar).

6 See the strong condemnation contained in UN Security Council Resolution 487, June 19, 1981.

7 There is a large literature on the Kosovo case. See, e.g., Booth, Ken, ed., The Kosovo Tragedy: The Human Rights Dimensions (London: Frank Cass, 2000Google Scholar).

8 See Robert Fisk, “The Dishonesty of This So-Called Dossier,”Independent, September 25, 2002, for an uncritical presentation of the charge that “we” have killed half a million Iraqi children; available at http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0925-03.htm. The British government has vigorously contested this interpretation. See, e.g., Tony Blair, “Prime Minister's Iraq Statement to Parliament,” September 24, 2002; available at http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page5.asp.

9 For a general discussion of this issue, see Brown, Chris, Sovereignty, Rights and Justice (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002Google Scholar).