The United States Preemptive Strike

Résumé: As a result of the events of Sptember 11, 2001, the United States of America changed its national security strategy. Following the attacks, administration of the United States under the leadership of president George W.Bush outlined a redically new foreign policy to fight modern global threts like the rise of terrorism, and the so-called <> as Iraq, which attemped to develop weapons of mass destruction, or provide them to terrorists. This new defense policy is called <> that was articulated in the Bush doctrine. However, a preemptive strike is an armed action that is pursued in the name of self defense as it was declared by Bush in the aftermanth of 9/11. Such a new kind of wat brought about a serious confrontation between the fundamental principles of international law and the UN Charter in one hand, and the right of the countries to launch a preemptive strike under the umbrella of self-defense on the other. Whereas, this act is conceived by some academics as legal, it is conceived by others as an illegal act and a breach to international order. Such a dilemma can be revealed in the first application of preemptive strike in the Iraqi war 2003 because the United States of America alleged that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction, as well as accusing him of the terrorist attack of the 9/11. However, these official justifications that the Bush administration relied on in the invasion of Iraq proved to be faulty. No weapons of mass destruction were found, nor links between Saddam and the terrorist attacks of 9/11, or Al-Qaeda proved to be true. the present dissertation, then contend that the preemptive strike as in the case of Iraq is merely a disguise of imperialism, a tool to globalization, controlling oil reserves in the Middle East, and to fulfill US national interests in the region.

Publié dans la revue: