Cejiss - The Central European Journal of International and Security Studies

Central European Journal of International and Security Studies

  • Úvod
  • Issues
      • Back
      • Ahead of Print
      • Current Issue
      • All issues & articles
      • 2022
      • 2021
      • 2020
      • 2019
      • 2018
      • 2017
      • 2016
      • 2015
      • 2014
      • 2013
      • 2012
      • 2011
      • 2010
      • 2009
      • 2008
      • 2007
      • Issues List
      • Issues Tiles
  • Book reviews
  • About Journal
      • Back
      • Aims & Scope
      • Editorial Team
      • Indexing
      • Contact us
      • Award
      • Annual Reports
      • Open Access & Licensing
  • Guidelines
      • Back
      • Citations & Style
      • Research Articles
      • Book Reviews
      • Special Issues
      • Thematic Sections
      • Ethical Guidelines
  • Submissions
      • Back
      • Submit your Article
  • Hledat Hledat
  • Hledat Hledat
  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2010
  • 2010 - Volume 4, Issue 1
  • Questioning the Dominance of Military Means: The Bush Administration’s Fight against Terrorism

Questioning the Dominance of Military Means: The Bush Administration’s Fight against Terrorism

  • Download article
    • Jan Ludvik
  • Volume: 4
  • Issue: 1
President Bush Giving a Speech

This work is devoted to investigating the variety of approaches that the US presidential administration of George W. Bush deployed to counter terrorism following 9/11. This topic deserves special attention because Bush’s approach to fighting terrorism is often misconceived as primarily or even only, military in nature. This perception, well established within public and to some extent scholarly discourses, significantly influences international views of the United States’ foreign policy. Furthermore, it can undermine understandings of terrorism and counterterrorism, more generally, which may have the adverse impact of heightening ambiguities over what consists of each. The 2009 change of presidential administrations produced extremely high expectations for a subsequent change of policy, including a different tract to the Global War on Terror (GWOT). The accession of the new administration offers an opportunity to close an era – the Bush administration and GWOT – and reflect on its impact.

This article is temporally limited to 11 September 2001 to 20 January 2009. Some scholars tend to view Bush’s reaction to terrorism (post-9/11) as primarily military. Jan Eichler from the Prague Institute of International Relations wrote that “Great emphasis of military means and methods of fight became dominant characteristics of Bush administration strategy.” Eichler’sassumption is based on the fact that the US counterterrorism strategy differed fundamentally from European approaches. According to Javier Solana, the underlying logic of such varieties of approaches to combating terrorism is based on divergence interpretations and sensitivities, among Europeans and Americans, to low-intensity threats in general terms. Europeans, given their long historical struggles against political communities which deployed asymmetrical violence, tend not to understand the so-called new challenges through military lenses and have been more inclusive in their approaches to dealing with terrorism, recognising that military means, on their own, will not produce sufficient outcomes.

  • Prev
  • Next
logo scopus
logo ebsco
logo proquest
logo mup

© 2007 - 2021 CEJISS. All rights reserved.
eISSN 1805-482X, ISSN 1802-548X,
https://doi.org/10.51870/CEJISS.XKVV3716

follow us on TwitterTwitter

CEJISS is an integral part of Metropolitan University Prague. Principles relating to processing and protection of personal data may be found here in the Czech language.