Preemption or perpetual war? (Insider Report).

Within a matter of weeks, the party line about the "War on Terrorism" has undergone an Orwellian metamorphosis. In early May, the Bush administration insisted that prior to September 11th, it was literally impossible for anybody to anticipate the Black Tuesday terrorist attacks. By early June, however, the administration had announced a new military doctrine of "preemption" or "defensive intervention," under which the U.S. would take military action against "rogue nations" or groups planning terrorist attacks. That doctrine assumes that the Bush administration can foresee such attacks with sufficient specificity to justify "preemptive" military action.

"If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," declared President Bush in his June 1st address to West Point graduates. "We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans, and confront the worst threats before they emerge. In the world we have entered, the only path to safety is the path of action. And this nation will act.... Our security will require transforming the military you will lead -- a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. And our security will require all Americans to be forward looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives." The president predicted that the new doctrine of "preemption" may lead to campaigns to uproot terrorist networks "in 60 or more countries."

It is true that there can be genuinely defensive preemptive action. However, the doctrine being crafted by the Bush administration could include "nuclear first strikes ... especially against biological weapons that can be best destroyed by sustained exposure to the high heat of a nuclear blast," the June 10th Washington Post reported, based on Pentagon sources. Nuclear strikes "would be considered weapons of last resort," and Pentagon planners are exploring "new ways of using conventional weapons to detect and destroy weapons arsenals...."

To carry out such missions, "the Pentagon is studying how to launch 'no warning' raids that go far beyond quick airstrikes," continued the Post. "The key tool to execute that mission is a new 'Joint Stealth Task Force' that pulls in the least detectable elements of every part of the armed forces, including radar-evading aircraft, Special Operations troops and ballistic submarines being converted to carry those troops and to launch those missiles."

Defense analyst Frank Hoffman correctly notes that the new "preemption" doctrine "runs completely against U.S. political and strategic culture." It is also entirely incompatible with the assignment of powers under the U.S. Constitution, which authorizes Congress exclusively to commit our nation to war. In the name of "defensive intervention," the Bush administration is claiming an open-ended power to make war on scores of countries around the world, without declaring war -- and using the sneak attack method, denounced as "infamous" when employed by the Japanese Empire at Pearl Harbor.