Wars of Interest, Choices of Responsibility
Two questions for Richard (and for this group, of which I'm grateful to be a part), building off of Geof and Todd's posts.
First, I'm interested to read how you portray the 1991 Gulf War as a "war of necessity" in a meaningful way. (I'm still reading your book, so my apologies in advance for going over ground you may be covering.) The argument advanced in your post for why the 2003 Iraq invasion was a war of choice -- "the United States had options besides force to deal with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein" -- could be fairly applied to the 1991 conflict as well. In that earlier war, the calculations of interest, the cost to the U.S. and the ultimate outcome make it appear a justified choice, but it's hardly the case that the U.S. had no option in 1991 but to oust Saddam from Kuwait. What's more, I see from skipping around (mea culpa) that you conclude the book by contending the U.S. shouldn't "rule out all wars of choice." If not, then isn't your argument really about the relationship between wars and the national interest, not about choice or necessity?
Second set of questions, this time building off Todd's post. In a generic sense, what do you think the responsibility is of officials who recognize an "ill-advised" war is on the way? Should such an official resign in protest, as some Foreign Service Officers and the White House counterterrorism czar did ahead of the 2003 Iraq invasion? Or is that too glib an understanding? What should a hypothetical Obama aide do if s/he comes to believe the troop escalation in Afghanistan places U.S. policy in a no-win situation and that the administration won't change course?
Have to say that I'm very impressed with this book club group so far. We had one post challenging the whole "necessity vs. choice" idea, one post pointing out that Haas did not oppose the 2003 Gulf War as he now claims and now one questioning Haas' assertion that the 1991 Gulf War was a "necessary action."
Think it's time for Haas to return to defend himself because he's taking a horrible beating so far.
June 10, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have a question for Mr. Haas: How do the just war theories apply to the wars he mentions? From Wikipedia, we find several elements, including: Just Cause, Comparative Justice, Legitimate Authority, Right Intention, Probability of Success, Last Resort, and Proportionality.
There are other versions, but this seems to capture the intention.
June 10, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
More pertinent to ask;
What should those within the administration (who oppose US/Israeli action against Iran) do if that option is on the way to being exercised?
June 10, 2009 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
What part of “unnecessary war of aggression” is so hard to understand?
June 10, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink