Military action but not as we know it: Libya, Syria and the making of an Obama Doctrine

Abstract

This article examines the evidence for a putative Obama Doctrine. Its main finding is that a Doctrine is identifiable and is characterised by a modus operandi deriving its strength not from what it threatens to do but from what it offers: a calibrated, multilateral response to egregious humanitarian crises. This nascent Doctrine is identifiable in three main ways: first, it is an attempt to clarify and institutionalise a response to the massive human rights violations that have typically engendered little or no action on the part of the USA. Second, it seeks to recast a series of false choices which have historically compelled an uncomfortable commitment to stability rather than the pursuit of reform. A third defining element concerns the practical application or operationalisation of this philosophy. While adding clarity – specifically in terms of identifying how and when to act – the Obama Doctrine is very broad indeed, raising concerns about both content and articulation.