Andrew Bacevich's The Washington Rules

1587 Words7 Pages
America with open arms has accepted the role of the world’s police. It could be argued that it created the role for itself. That is the premise of Andrew Bacevich’s Washington Rules. Bacevich discusses over sixty years of American Foreign Policy, from Truman to now, to explain the premise of the “Washington Rules.” The Washington Rules is about American militarist belief that Americans must “lead, save, liberate, and ultimately transform the world”, this could only be accomplished by an idea described by Bacevich as “the sacred trinity”. The sacred trinity is defined as “an abiding conviction that the minimum essentials of international peace and order require the United States to maintain a global military presence, to configure its forces…show more content…
The Cold War was over, the Soviet Union no longer existed, and no one took their place as a rival to the United States so what reason, if any, was there to keep the “Washington Rules”. For modern day semiwarriors, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, there were plenty. Cheney and Rumsfeld were crucial members of the Bush administration with Cheney serving as the vice-president and Rumsfeld as the secretary of defense. Following 9/11, the Bush Administration distributed American troops around the world instead of placing them in reserve for when they’re needed. By having troops around the globe, the Administration felt they could properly prevent any attack or threat to the United States. This granted the executive branch the power to use the troops for anything they felt would protect the nature. No longer would the President have to go to war through Congress. Cheney and Rumsfeld changed the “Washington Rules” from being about containment to liberation. The United States no longer had to contain the spread of communist, but instead had to liberate the countries of the Middle East that they felt were run by an improper government. With the privilege of having troops at their disposal and a goal of liberation, Cheney and Rumsfeld along with the whole Bush Administration had the world in the palm of their hand. These modern semiwarriors are no longer content in intervening to keep the enemy at bay, but to promptly…show more content…
The only chapter where I felt Bacevich took a stance was the last chapter. During the rest of the text, Bacevich implied his stance without directly stating it. My reasoning for why he failed to take a stance was his knowledge of his audience. He’s most likely aware that the vast majority of his readers are isolationists or believe that the power of the military is exceeding what it should. Bacevich subtly hints his position as he knows his audience shares his views on the issue. He rather let the readers develop their stance based on the information he presented instead of attempting to sway the audience with a concrete stance and

More about Andrew Bacevich's The Washington Rules

Open Document