"In a unipolar world, the Bush doctrine of preemptive war allowed
Washington to assert itself without fear of contradiction. The Bush
doctrine, however, was never meant to be emulated by others and was
therefore implicitly predicated on the notion that all challengers
would be weaker than the United States throughout the 21st century.
Bush and Cheney are now getting a glimpse of a multipolar world in
which other powers can adopt their modus operandi with impunity. Bush's
rhetoric may have sounded like that of President Woodrow Wilson, but
his policy has often been to support the overthrow or hobbling of
elected governments that he does not like -- and that has not gone
unnoticed by countries that also count themselves great powers and
would not mind following suit.
The problem with international law for a superpower is that it is a
constraint on overweening ambition. Its virtue is that it constrains
the aggressive ambitions of others. Bush gutted it because he thought
the United States would not need it anytime soon. But Russia is now
demonstrating that the Bush doctrine can just as easily be the Putin
doctrine. And that leaves America less secure in a world of vigilante
powers that spout rhetoric about high ideals to justify their unchecked
military interventions. It is the world that Bush has helped build..."