Bush clings to pre-emptive force

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President George W. Bush clung to
his doctrine of using preemptive force against threats of
weapons of mass destruction on Thursday despite his experience
in Iraq, and said Iran may be America’s biggest security
challenge.

A new White House national security strategy document said
it was the strong U.S. preference to use international
diplomacy to address weapons proliferation concerns.

“If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of
self-defense, we do not rule out the use of force before
attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and
place of the enemy’s attack,” the document said.

Bush outlined the preemptive force doctrine in 2002 and
many critics believe he used it as a framework for the U.S.-led
invasion of Iraq three years ago over weapons of mass
destruction that were never found.

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy said it was
ominous that the Bush administration “would even attempt to
resuscitate its radical doctrine of preventive war.”

“By any standard, it’s been an utter failure in Iraq and
has weakened our security, not strengthened it,” Kennedy said.

The United States and its European allies are locked in a
test of wills with Iran over suspicions that Tehran is trying
to develop a nuclear weapons program despite its insistence
that it merely wants atomic power for civilian use.

“We may face no greater challenge from a single country
than from Iran,” said the new strategy document.

White House national security adviser Stephen Hadley
defended the policy at the U.S. Institute of Peace, saying it
was essential in the wake of the September 11 attacks and with
militant groups seeking to acquire dangerous weapons.

“The president has made clear we need to use all the tools
of national power to try to deal with and avoid that threat,
but at the end of the day, effective use of military force in a
smart, measured way has to remain part of your inventory,” he
said.

DIPLOMACY BEFORE CONFRONTATION

The document emphasized the need for diplomacy, while
adding without elaboration: “This diplomatic effort must
succeed if confrontation is to be avoided.”

Bush has never taken the military option off the table,
although experts believe U.S. involvement in the Iraq war is a
limiting factor.

A national security expert at the Cato Institute think
tank, Ted Galen Carpenter, saw a link between Bush’s retention
of the preemptive force policy and the talk of Iran as a major
challenge.

“Highlighting Iran as the principal threat that the United
States faces certainly brings the preemption doctrine back into
play,” he said.

Ivo Daalder, a national security expert at the Brookings
Institution think tank, said he believed Bush was using the
document to shift strategy away from emphasizing force to
focusing more on diplomacy because he has learned that threats
cannot be defeated by military force alone.

“It (the Bush administration) has been forced to change
course by necessity rather than out of conviction,” he said.

The document cited other concerns about Iran: that it
sponsors terrorism; threatens Israel, seeks to thwart Middle
East peace; disrupts democracy in Iraq, and denies freedom to
Iranians. It said these can only be resolved if Iran makes the
strategic decision to change its policies, open its political
system and allow freedom.

“This is the ultimate goal of U.S. policy,” the document
said. “In the interim, we will continue to take all necessary
measures to protect our national and economic security against
the adverse effects of their bad conduct.”

The document sought to draw a line between Iran’s leaders
and the Iranian people, saying “our strategy is to block the
threats posed by the regime while expanding our engagement and
outreach to the people the regime is oppressing.”