The Bush Doctrine and Neoconservatism: A Chinese Perspective
Stewart Hamilton,Jinxuan (Ann) Zhang
2005-01-01
Harvard International Law Journal
Abstract:On June 1, 2002, in an address at West Point, U.S. President George W. Bush announced a new set of foreign policy principles that has come to be known as the “Bush Doctrine.” The doctrine consists of three basic elements. First, the United States would no longer rely solely on “Cold War doctrines of containment and deterrence,” but would instead pursue a strategy of preemptive intervention in order to “take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge.” Second, the United States would concentrate on exporting democracy, since “the requirements of freedom apply fully to Africa, Latin America, and the entire Islamic world.” Finally, the United States would maintain its military supremacy beyond challenge, “thereby making the destabilizing arms races of other eras pointless, and limiting rivalries to trade and other pursuits of peace.”1 In September 2002, the Bush administration released the National Security Strategy of the United States, which formalized these three elements of the Bush Doctrine: preemptive strike, promotion of democracy, and military supremacy. It was widely reported in the Western press that the Bush Doctrine had strong roots in the neoconservative school of thought in the United States. Early drafts of former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz’s report Defense Planning Guidance contained the three basic elements of the Bush Doctrine as early as 1992. In 1997, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, and Robert Kagan founded the Project for the New American Century.2 In August 18, 1997, Irving Kristol, the father of William Kristol and U.S. neoconservitism, predicted the rise of the neocon-