by, Jun 09 2012 at 03:48 PM (226 Views)
Justifying War in Democracies remains an arduous task, a dilemma that plagues politicians. Use of Force results in both human and capital costs, which remain inherently unpopular. I offer the “Poignant Moment Theory”, a specific event that catalyzes domestic support and patriotism to cultivate the necessary domestic support for foreign intervention.
American Civil War 1861: Bombardment & Surrender of Fort Sumter
Spanish-American War 1898: USS Maine destroyed in Havana Harbor
World War I 1914: Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria
World War II 1941: Attack on Pearl Harbor & Singapore.
Following World War II, international bodies were established to justify foreign conflicts by consensus.
Korean War 1950: North Korean troops breach 38th Parallel, UN Security Council condemns the offensive action by a 9-0 vote as a, “Breach of the Peace.”
Vietnam War 1964: Gulf of Tonkin Incident
September 11, 2011: War on Terror
What appears on the verge of occurring is another conflict in the Middle East. The belligerents will undoubtedly be Iran and a combination of other nations. My concern is that the opposition might also consist of the Russians and Chinese. Furthermore, this could be a protracted conflict requiring sacrifices of American soldiers. The question remains, what is the goal? Is the goal noble, as in spreading Democracy and freeing citizens from the rule of despotic regimes. Or is the goal more oriented towards preserving the United States’ and Western Worlds Empire Status?
Furthermore, how will the necessary use of force be justified to American citizens. Will protecting our Ally Israel's sovereignty be the means. Throughout time, justifying Israel's defense has been a proxy for overall justification of action throughout the region.