In July 1994, in accordance with Section 603 of the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Department Reorganization Act of 1986, the Clinton Administration published its first National Security Strategy. Entitled A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement, the document formally articulated the US strategic objective of "protecting, consolidating and enlarging the community of free market democracies" through an active yet selective US engagement around the world.[1] Only through such a

more »

... rship role, it was argued, could the United States protect its vital interests and promote stable, peaceful international relations. The US military strategy in support of the national security strategy appeared in 1995 with the subtitle "A Strategy of Flexible and Selective Engagement." This military strategy consists of three main components: "peacetime engagement, deterrence and conflict prevention, and fighting and winning our Nation's wars."[2] Peacetime engagement is described further as including "military-to-military contacts, nation assistance, security assistance, humanitarian operations, counterdrug and counterterrorism, and peacekeeping."[3] Peace enforcement as a military operation is included under the second component, deterring aggression and preventing conflict. It is clear from these two documents that current US strategy, both national security and military, entails a substantial commitment to peace operations as a way in which to use our military resources in pursuit of our strategic objectives. At this general level, the relationship between ends, ways, and means is clear enough. But the relationship becomes considerably less clear as we press for more specificity, and as the range of possible military options under the heading of peace operations expands. The purpose of this article is to examine US strategy, as it pertains to the use of peace operations, with greater specificity.