Striking First: Preemption and Prevention in International Conflict

Abstract

‘‘Traditional preemption,’’ writes Michael Doyle, ‘‘is too strict and the Bush administration’s expansive prevention is too loose’’ (p. 43). Doyle intervenes with a proposal for how to limit and structure decisions about when to strike first. For him the key is not only the question ‘‘When is preventive war justified?’’ but also ‘‘What decision-making criteria might most likely be recognized and adopted by the international community?’’ Striking First is based on Doyle’s Tanner Lectures,