opinionWar

Limp into Iraq, Limp Out: Time to Revive the ‘Powell Doctrine’?

Recently White House and Pentagon officials have hinted that the U.S.-led bombing campaign against ISIS may last many months, if not years. The White House has held firm that there will be no more boots on the ground in Iraq, except the hundreds of advisers stationed in Iraq (and likely hundreds more there unofficially). Regarding troop commitments, the Pentagon has been noncommittal or even made comments contrary to the White House position. If “no boots” holds true and recent history is any guide, expect a protracted conflict with dwindling public support and an indecisive outcome.

The Washington Post recently reported on the trend, dating back to the Korean War: U.S. public support for wars spikes or levels off in positive territory in the beginning, only to steadily decline as time wears on. This makes intuitive sense—war is a terrible thing, and the longer it lasts without resolution, the more unbearable its costs.

Today the U.S. military enjoys full-spectrum dominance over opposing military forces. That includes state as well as non-state actors in virtually every category. America’s capability to inflict losses on its foes at very low risk to its own forces is unparalleled in history. Yet, despite America’s clear military capability to decisively end military conflicts, it has elected not to do so. Both post-9/11 U.S. presidents have chosen to pursue ‘light footprints’ when they go to war.

All of America’s post-9/11 military interventions have, at least by their end, proven unpopular, protracted, and indecisive. George W Bush decided to pursue a campaign in Afghanistan heavily reliant on Special Operations Forces teamed up with local fighters. Though successful in capturing Afghanistan, it did not eliminate bin Laden, his lieutenants, or the Taliban, who snuck across the border into Pakistan. The administration also famously rejected and eventu