The Bush Doctrine works – when it is applied properly. It follows in the same path laid out by past US hegemonic aspirations at new world orders. Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy [all Democrats]; and Reagan had their own doctrines. Past calls to reform the world or combat evil in various forms always involved moral clarity; military power; financial resources; and ultimately patience and intelligence. The Bush Doctrine, aimed at fascistic Islam, and 'draining the swamps' of the Middle East is no different.

The Bush Doctrine is of course much maligned. Criticism of the doctrine comes from all over the ideological map and most of the criticism is invalid. The media and educational establishments of course rejoice and report every dissenting view – but offer nothing in the place of the Bush Doctrine. The Bush Doctrine is the right way forward – but only if military might is used properly, which for 3.5 years in Iraq [as many of us knuckle dragging 'neo-cons' screamed], it was not.

What is the Bush Doctrine and why doesn't the media report what the doctrine is, in its entirety?

The Bush Doctrine is based on a realistic assessment of the challenge posed by radical Islam. It can best be summarised by a speech Bush gave on September 20th 2001: 'We have seen their kind before. They are the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the twentieth century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value execpt the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism, and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends – in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies.'

This is brilliant. In one paragraph Bush summarizes what is at hand with the radical elements of Islam. First, Islam is an ideology of 'will to power' [male Muslims must rule, Islam must dominate etc]; and is inherently fascist [no free will]. Second, Islam follows Nazism and Communism in its commitment to eradicate civilisation, justice, morality and the juridical personality. Third, Islam for all its murderous pagan energy, is doomed to failure – as long as we can recognise the ideology for what it is.

This one paragraph is the best short summation of what is at stake.

Now flowing from this rationale comes the Bush Doctrine. The doctrine itself rejects all previously inept and failed attempts to address, appease, rationalise or reason with Islam. For over 50 years, various US policies have tried and failed, to either modernise Islam, contain it, or seek an accomodation with it.

Various 'isms' – realism, liberalism, and internationalism primary among them – were tried and they failed. The Bush Doctrine broke with all past frameworks and adopted a new, and singularly logical plan to deal with Islam – use exogenous force to change radical, terror sponsoring Muslim regimes, their society, and ultimately their culture.

By definition the Bush Doctrine is ineluctably a military-based option. Military power, combined with economics, new pluralist democratic structures, and at some level, a new culture, must or at least has the potential to, refashion the states of the Middle East. It does not require a military occupation of every state, but only the key states which will form the basis for regional-wide change.

Page 1 of 3 :: First | Last :: Prev | 1 2 3 | Next