Post Cold War Era: Will The Old Rules Support A New Strategy.

摘要

War is that condition that exists when a state feels that its vital interests are at stake and seeks to impose its will on an adversary through the use of force. This use of war to achieve a particular end is nearly as old as mankind itself and has evolved a body of philosophical law addressing the moral justification of this violent tool. This body of law, the Just War Criteria, has developed principally over the last 1,500 years, and has served well to distinguish the 'just' from the 'unjust' wars, especially as applied to what is now referred to as conventional combat (i.e., non-nuclear). Through vigorous debate, the Just War Criteria also has served reasonably well over the last 30 years to underpin nuclear deterrence between the United States and the Soviet Union. With the fall of the Soviet Union there is only one remaining 'superpower': the United States. But there are steadily increasing numbers of nations, adversary and ally, that have weapons of mass destruction, some with responsible governments and some with very suspect ones. Conventional weaponry, both high-tech and low-tech, is available to virtually every state with the desire and the cash. Compounding the multiple threats that now face the United States from around the globe is the large military force drawdown which the U.S. is currently undergoing. Clearly, a new national security strategy is required to allow the United States to accommodate to these profound changes. But will a new strategy formulated and based on the traditional criteria of a Just War be sufficient to respond to the world that the United States is now facing. To address that question, this paper reviews the historical basis for the Just War Criteria; briefly discusses the strategies of the United States during the 20th Century based on those criteria; and discusses the dilemma facing the nation as it attempts to formulate a military strategy sufficient for the anticipated challenges.