Individuals and nations who now continue to think and plan on the basis of security policies and strategies of the 1990s have not understood the message of September 11th 2001. The subsequent war against the Taliban Regime in Afghanistan called Operation ‘Enduring Freedom’, started on October 7th 2001 and was the beginning of a long lasting, world-wide mission involving several states’ means for combating newly emerging threats. Thus, it was for certain that the twelve-year holiday of history (1990 - 2001) had come to an end.
The reform of strategic deterrence has gone through the alleged new doctrine of preemptive. It has been the cause of major controversy and virulent debates in the international community, in the media and public especially at the end of 2002 and beginning of 2003, when the USA and the UK were threatening to wage a ‘preemptive’ war against Iraq. This issue came to its peak on March 20th 2003 when the US led armed forces launched military operations against the so-called rogue state of Iraq. Both the Bush administration and 10 Downing Street received considerable international condemnation. Understandably, and perhaps deliberately, the distinction between preemptive, which has long been accepted in international law, and prevention, became confused.
The distinction between preemptive and prevention is cardinal. The former could be perceived as an aggressive sword and the latter as a defensive shield, but such an approach is wrong. Indeed, preemptive implies the imminence of a threat whereas prevention deals with a hostile danger, though not imminent. So prevention, of itself, is more aggressive than preemptive. Preemptive can be considered as a natural reflex, prevention as a response to a distant danger, a matter of foresight and free choice. This distinction, which contains elements of paradox, has not been understood and this had added to the confusion surrounding the casus belli for the recent war against Iraq manifested by quizzical ignoramuses.
In the light of the new emphasis on ‘preemptive’, in the National Security Strategy of the United States of America, this distinction must be properly understood. If, in the future, democratic governments are to convince their peoples that they are going to war for the right reasons, they need to be honest and not to try to pass prevention as ‘preemptive.’
Die Inhaltsangabe kann sich auf eine andere Ausgabe dieses Titels beziehen.
Erick Labara was born in 1963 in Lausanne, Switzerland. After studying political and military sciences, he entered the Swiss Army as a professional artillery officer in 1988. He became General Staff officer in 1995, and was assigned to the G3 cell (operations) of a tank brigade.
From 1997 to 2000 he commanded an Artillery Battalion and returned to brigade staff in 2001 as a G2 (intelligence) officer. In 2003 Erick Labara became the first Swiss Officer to earn a British Master of Science degree in Global Security from the Defence Academy of the United Kingdom at the Royal Military College of Science through Cranfield University. Currently he works at the General Staff School; he holds the rank of lieutenant-colonel.
Erick Labara is an avid writer, former world champion and five-time Guinness Book of World Records Holder in Sit-ups (1981), a pilot, 4th Dan black belt in Judo, and talented cook who enjoys fine gastronomy from all over the world.
„Über diesen Titel“ kann sich auf eine andere Ausgabe dieses Titels beziehen.
Anbieter: Any Amount of Books, London, Vereinigtes Königreich
8vo. pp 191. Colour illustrated wraps. Inscribed by the author to military historian Richard Holmes: 'To Richard, Thank you so much for your brilliant teaching. Thanks to it, I was able to write this book, Eric Labara. Shrivenham, 15.7.04'. ISBN: 0972697578 About fine. Bestandsnummer des Verkäufers C39034
Anzahl: 1 verfügbar