Bush Doctrine Vs American Doctrine

Over time, the president’s executive power has dramatically increased in cases of emergency and war. One such case is that of George W. Bush and his stance of preemptive strikes on Iraq known as the Bush Doctrine. The doctrine was met with much support, however, caused much controversy later. The Bush Doctrine, although allowed, was in violation of the Constitution and lacked approval from congress. Although the use of preemptive strikes was allowed due to lack of clarity in the constitution regarding presidential power, it was technically an act of war that was not approved by congress. However, although not approved by congress, the preemptive strikes were viewed as a necessary evil by the American Public and the Bush Administration.

However, critics of the Bush doctrine point out the unilateralism shown by the Bush Administration. Essentially saying that if you weren’t with America, you were against it. After 9/11, much of the constraints and treaties that held back American interventionism were peeled away. Dolan says that “the Bush administration’s strong ambivalence toward multilateralism deprived international institutions the necessary powers to respond to nontraditional security issues such as conflicts over natural resources, public health and infectious diseases, international crime, and environmental degradation (The Bush Doctrine and U.S. Interventionism,

One such concern was the way the Bush Doctrine took military power away from congress and the way it was becoming a tool for only the president’s use. The article the Bush Doctrine by Gerry Warren sums up this tension: “Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, Congress alone is granted the power to declare war. But under Article II, Section 2, the President is designated as the Commander in Chief. This historical tension in the Constitution is the natural by—product of a checks—and—balances system of government (The Bush Doctrine, Warren).” In 1973, congress passed the the War Powers Act. This was used to limit the president’s ability to send U.S. Troops into combat without explicit congressional approval. The article states that “no President has ever recognized the law and conceded he was subject to it. Each has instead merely informed the Congress 'consistent with' the Act of the military action he was taking, effectively rendering the Act without meaning (The Bush Doctrine, Warren).” With the new environment of warfare, the tension between congress and the president will become worse due to the way warfare has changed in an increasingly digital