|
|
|
|
 | Striking First: |
Does the United States have the right to defend itself by striking first, or must it wait until an attack is in progress? Is the Bush Doctrine of aggressive preventive action a justified and legal recourse against threats posed by terrorists and rogue states? Tackling one of the most controversial policy issues of the post-September 11 world, Michael Doyle argues that neither the Bush Doctrine nor customary international law is capable of adequately responding to the pressing security threats of our times. In Striking First, Doyle shows how the Bush Doctrine has consistently disregarded a vital distinction in international law between acts of preemption in the face of imminent threats and those of prevention in the face of the growing offensive capability of an enemy. Taking a close look at the Iraq war, the 1998 attack against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other conflicts, he contends that international law must rely more completely on United Nations Charter procedures and develop better standards for dealing with serious threats. After explaining how the UN can again play an important role in enforcing international law and strengthening international guidelines for responding to threats, he describes the rare circumstances when unilateral action is indeed necessary. Based on the 2006 Tanner Lectures at Princeton University, Striking First includes responses by distinguished political theorists Richard Tuck and Jeffrey McMahan and international law scholar Harold Koh, yielding a lively debate that will redefine how--and for what reasons--tomorrow's wars are fought. Michael W. Doyle is the Harold Brown Professor of International Affairs, Law, and Political Science at Columbia University and served as assistant secretary-general and special adviser to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan. His books include Making War and Building Peace(Princeton) and Ways of War and Peace. "[Doyle] points out...the Bush doctrine is not only dangerously 'subjective' and 'open-ended' but also an 'invitation to chaos' because other states may claim the right to invoke it for their own purposes...Instead of embracing the Bush administration's radical alternative, however, Doyle calls for updating the doctrine of preemption without collapsing it into prevention."--William A. Galston, American Prospect "The arguments presented are lucid, earnest, and thoughtful. Accepting that preemption might be necessary, Doyle builds on the traditional criteria to stress the importance of the lethality and likelihood of the threat and the legitimacy and legality of the response."--Lawrence D. Freedman, Foreign Affairs "Striking First highlights the dilemma that the United States confronts. Doyle has contributed a thoughtful and significant work to the jus ad bellum conundrum that will surely fuel further useful debate."--Davis R. Robinson, American Journal of International Law Endorsements: "A big subject is starkly caught in Michael Doyle's bright headlights. The remedies he proposes are among the most sensible on offer. Cleverly, the author engages in dialogue with other leading thinkers, putting his ideas to a coherent test. This book journeys into the heart of unilateralism and emerges with a plausible theory."--Thomas M. Franck, New York University School of Law "The arguments about whether or when to strike first are passionate, dangerous, and critically necessary. Michael Doyle brings to these arguments a calm voice, vast knowledge, practical experience, and political wisdom. His book is indispensable."--Michael Walzer, Institute for Advanced Study Acknowledgments by Michael W. Doyle vii Striking First International Law and Current Standards 7 Another Princeton book by Michael W. Doyle: Another Princeton book by Stephen Macedo: Series:
Subject Areas: | |||||||
Prices subject to change without notice File created: 11/4/2009 | |||||||
Questions and comments to: webmaster@press.princeton.edu | |||||||
