Abstract
This thesis examines what criteria Presidents should use when considering the use of force to pursue the national interest. The decision to commit troops is the most important decision a president makes because the cost is in the American treasure of both blood and capital. The Powell Doctrine has guided Presidents since the 1990s and is still referred to by Presidential administrations. More recently, the Mullen Doctrine has entered the current conversation as a potential guide for Presidential decisions on the use of force. This study examines each doctrine, its origins, and then theoretically applies them in historical case studies, relative to the operational environments of the past 20 years. |The choice of doctrine depends largely on the President’s assessment of the operational environment and thereby determines which doctrine is the best guide. I argue that the Mullen Doctrine is the most relevant doctrine, given the current nature of conflict, and should be the predominant doctrine guiding the current administration. This study shows the relationships between a President’s overall worldview and potential for success or failure in military conflict. Analysis of the significant wars that occurred during the last three completed Presidential administrations, and the current one in Afghanistan, provide the evidence for my thesis and suggests that the Mullen Doctrine is the most relevant doctrine for President Obama to use today.