President Obama and other senior US officials make constant reference to America being “a nation at war.” This is politically necessary to say and obviously the case because the US has nearly a hundred thousand troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan and reports combat casualties daily.
To the extent that The Wire has had anything to say about the events of 9/11, which it implicitly comments upon during its five seasons, it is the message of continuity that stands out. Too much has been made about how the world changed on 9/11. And while it would be altogether fraught to claim that nothing has changed, it is also true that the world which existed before 9/11 continues to exist today.
In order to avoid losing ground in a geopolitically pivotal region of the world, the US must be bold. Today, Iran and the increasingly confident Shia of the Middle East are playing a central role in shaping what the region will look like a generation from now. The US must be able to adapt to the shifting sands and not cling rigidly to yesteryear’s policy prescriptions.
The kind of conventional military brinkmanship going on at the common NATO-Russia border is not good news. A phenomenon not seen since the frostiest Cold War periods. If the last East-West confrontation offers a cautionary tale, it is that the situation urgently needs to be de-escalated, before worst-case scenarios become self-fulfilling prophecies.
It is seven years since a US led coalition invaded Iraq, deposing Saddam Hussein and becoming involved in a long, costly stabilization operation that is supposedly about to end soon with the withdrawal of US combat units. More than 4,700 coalition troops, 4,385 of them Americans, have died so far in this effort.
There is a growing critique of the hegemonic discourse on the ‘War on Terror’ against the backdrop of an overwhelming silence about the impacts of the global WOT on the non-Western and particularly the Muslim world. The new critique is based on: the dominance of ‘state-centric’ perspectives; the pre-eminence of ‘problem-solving’ approaches; and largely ahistorical accounts of terrorism.
Much has been written about cybercrime, cyberterrorism and cyberwarfare, but very little has been written about how, and why, these evolving threat categories differ from their real-world analogues. This is unfortunate, because the differences between the threat categories mean that the laws and strategies devised to deal with real-world threats are often ineffectual in dealing with cyber-mediated threats.
Cutting through the friendly appearance and conciliatory rhetoric of the Obama administration does not detract from the reality that regarding the Middle East, nothing of substance has changed as the Iranian President asserts.
President Obama has deemed this an era of ‘extended hand’ diplomacy, in which the United States must reach out to its adversaries in an effort to build on mutual interests and respect. In doing so, U.S. diplomats have promised to utilize a strategy of smart power. The ability of such a strategy to meet U.S. needs and global problems now faces its first real test as the U.S. undergoes negotiations with Iran concerning their uranium enrichment program.
The Bush doctrine took shape throughout the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, developing in various speeches by the President and high ranking staff. This essay considers how the doctrine complimented, or challenged international law.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.
