The Bush Doctrine and the Iraq War: Neoconservatives Versus Realists

  title={The Bush Doctrine and the Iraq War: Neoconservatives Versus Realists},
  author={Brian C. Schmidt and Michael C. Williams},
  journal={Security Studies},
  pages={191 - 220}
The aim of this article is to contribute to our understanding of both the debate over the war in Iraq and its implications for the future of U.S. foreign policy by examining the relationship between neoconservatism and realism. The article begins by establishing the connection between the tenets of neoconservatism and the arguments for war against Iraq. The primary focus is on the neoconservative Bush Doctrine that served as the primary justification for the Iraq War. Next, we turn to the… Expand
The Iraq Invasion: the Neoconservative Perspective
The 2003 invasion of Iraq remains one of the most controversial interventions of the 21st century, in which the primary justification was arguably provided by the ‘Bush Doctrine’, a collection ofExpand
The US invasion of Iraq: failings and consequences
  • 2020
This paper will argue that the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was a manifestation of the neoconservative agenda, which was well established before the Bush junior administration and was able toExpand
The perils of realist advocacy and the promise of securitization theory: Revisiting the tragedy of the Iraq War debate
Why does realist political advocacy for a more limited national security agenda fail? For nearly two decades, realists in general and Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer in particular have publiclyExpand
The 2003 Iraq War
The execution of the 2003 Iraq War, like the war in Afghanistan, resulted from US foreign policy changes in the post-9/11 period. However, unlike Afghanistan, the United States lacked widespreadExpand
The Bush Doctrine and Presidential Rhetoric: Change and Continuity in US Foreign Policy
This research analyzes the presidential rhetoric employed to communicate the Bush Doctrine foreign policy objectives to the American public in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks until theExpand
Iraq: a liberal war after all: a critique of Dan Deudney and John Ikenberry
As the fifteenth anniversary of the Iraq war approaches, a debate has arisen over the war’s intellectual origins. G. John Ikenberry and Dan Deudney argue that it was predominantly a realist war, notExpand
The moral purpose of US power: neoconservatism in the age of Obama
The ‘neoconservative moment’ is widely assumed to have come and gone with the George W. Bush administration. This article argues, however, that the hope that the neoconservative chapter in US foreignExpand
Why was Iraq Invaded in 2003
This research seeks to provide an analysis of why the invasion of Iraq occurred in 2003. War is not an event that emerges in isolation; therefore this research will provide an examination of theExpand
How should we analyze the dialogue over war and peace in the United States? If, as many studies hold, an important part of the debate is about justifying and rebutting justifications of martialExpand
Why did the United States lead an invasion of Iraq in 2003
In the years since the invasion, there have been substantial disagreements among scholars regarding the explanations of why the United States invaded Iraq. Nonetheless, it is clear in the decision toExpand


Hans Morgenthau and the Iraq war: realism versus neo-conservatism
Hans Joachim Morgenthau was one of the most important political thinkers of the 20th century and one of the great realist thinkers of all time. Morgenthau, along with almost all realists in theExpand
Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy
  • T. V. Paul
  • Political Science
  • International Security
  • 2005
Analysts have argued that balance of power theory has become irrelevant to understanding state behavior in the post-Cold War international system dominated by the United States. Second-tier majorExpand
The Unipolar Illusion Revisited: The Coming End of the United States' Unipolar Moment
  • C. Layne
  • Political Science
  • International Security
  • 2006
The conventional wisdom among U.S. grand strategists is that U.S. hegemony is exceptionalthat the United States need not worry about other states engaging in counterhegemonic balancing against it.Expand
American Primacy in Perspective
MORE THAN A DECADE AGO, political columnist Charles Krauthammer proclaimed in these pages the arrival of what he called a "unipolar moment," a period in which one superpower, the United States, stoodExpand
Soft Balancing against the United States
  • R. Pape
  • Political Science
  • International Security
  • 2005
The George W. Bush administration's national security strategy, which asserts that the United States has the right to attack and conquer sovereign countries that pose no observable threat, and to doExpand
The Tragedy of Great Power Politics
As Others See Us: The Causes and Consequences of Foreign Perceptions of America
List of Illustrations Preface Introduction * The Three -Isms of Cognitive Isolationism * The American Dream Machine * Mass and Elite Perceptions of America * A Values Gap? * Elite Perceptions ofExpand
The challenge to produce articles for each issue seems to increase as the turfgrass management season heats up. It has also, been difficult for me to find time to contact newsletter committee membersExpand
A valuable recent treatment is Jean-Francois Drolet
  • The Conservative Debate On Iraq
  • 2005
Thomas Frank captures the tenor of these alliances more critically in What's Wrong With America?
  • The Resistable Rise of the American Right
  • 2004