vention During the BushAdministrationAs Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful armed force in a worldplagued by small military crises, the question ultimately becomes: when does acrisis call for intervention? From 1988 to 1992, this was President GeorgeBush’s dilemma. The days of the United States fearing embroilment ininternational affairs due to the towering menace of the USSR and globaldestruction ended at about the same time as Bush ascended the Presidency.
However, with the threat of the USSR gone, the importance of small scaleconflicts had taken priority in maintaining world peace. Further, the fall ofcommunism had left the United States with a leading role in world politics. Inthat position, with a powerful armed force behind it, the United States carriedthe heavy responsibility of how and why to use it’s new found eminence. Thatresponsibility fell onto the shoulders of Mr.
George Bush as the first AmericanPresident to sit in that exalted position. His actions would determine theUnited States’ place in the new world order and set the path that futurePresidents would have to carefully tread.The world order that President Bush inherited was of a vastly differentcharacter then that of all his predecessors.
The Cold War environment that theworld had just left behind had provided a clear framework for national securitypolicy and the use of the US military. The environment that Bush walked into wasan environment filled with disagreement and confusion over the new frameworkwith which the US should operate. It was also an environment with which therole of Congress was almost eliminated as President Bush continually authorizedmilitary operations without the full consent of Congress. It was an environmentwhere the executive held the power to use the military based on his own intent. During his term in the Presidency, George Bush was confronted with manyopportunities to demonstrate his intent for the US military. The four yearswhile Bush was President saw crisis situations occur with alarming frequency.
Ineach of these crisis areas, gross human rights violations were committed. Insome cases he reacted with swift military action, in the name of humanitarianism,while in other cases he allowed sanctions to do the job. The crisis situationswhere he advocated a military intervention and the situations where he did notboth tell the whole story. In analyzing these actions, it can be ascertainedwhich variables promoted a military intervention and which did not.The VariablesThere are many variables that could influence the United States’decision to send a military intervention, however very few are relevant,quantifiable or could possibly have a strong influence over such an importantdecision.
Therefore, based on published literature and observation there appearto be five compelling variables which would have