No Grand Strategy and No Ultimate Aim 
Stephen Holmes on US policy in Iraq
- Incoherent Empire by Michael Mann
The defining reality of today’s international order is no longer 11 September but America’s increasingly bloody occupation of a turbulent Iraq. So why did the Bush administration shift its attention from tracking down Osama bin Laden and a limited number of al-Qaida fugitives to reordering the Iraqi political system in line with American interests and values? This diversion of resources from a clandestine war against a proven enemy to the uphill stabilisation of a wretchedly abused and fractured society seems extraordinarily illogical, even self-defeating. Commentators seeking to make sense of it are now filling the bookstores with volumes devoted to the American ‘empire’. But how appropriate is this evocative term?
Subscribers to the print edition can log in to view the entire article. For information about subscribing to the London Review of Books click here. This article is available for purchase online. Buy this article.
Stephen Holmes teaches at New York University School of Law. His most recent book is The Matador’s Cape: America’s Reckless Response to Terror.
Other articles by this contributor:
Give me the man · the pursuit of Clinton
Neo-Con Futurology · the incoherent thinking behind US foreign policy
Looking Away · Questions of Intervention
Free-Marketeering · Naomi Klein
Transitology · Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia by Stephen Cohen
print layout
tell a friend