Follow us on social

google cta
Https___cdn.cnn_.com_cnnnext_dam_assets_181005195144-exp-gps-1007-powell-albright-sot-blasey-ford-kavanaugh-00003301

Remembering Powell's revealing exchange with Madeleine Albright

The 'reluctant warrior' said he thought he would 'have an aneurysm' after her full-throated plea for military action in Bosnia.

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

The death of former Secretary of State Colin Powell has raised the specter of his role in the U.S. invasion of Iraq — namely, his speech to the UN presenting purported (later revealed to be wrong) evidence of Saddam Hussein’s WMDs, which proved as a pivotal moment in garnering public support for the war.

But Powell, who not only served as chief diplomat, national security adviser, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but also four star general of the Army and Vietnam veteran, has never been accused of being the most voraciously gung-ho soldier when it comes to war. In fact, he’s been known for the opposite, and for good reason.

Possibly the most notable moment and one that best encapsulates the “Powell Doctrine” is this extraordinarily tense exchange with Madeleine Albright, then Secretary of State, over whether the Clinton administration should authorize NATO airstrikes on Bosnia in 1993.

"My constant, unwelcome message at all the meetings on Bosnia was simply that we could not commit military forces until we had a clear political objective," Powell wrote in his memoir, “My American Journey.” Albright, he wrote, "asked me, 'What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it?' I thought I would have an aneurysm." 

Powell also said Albright, who once said the death of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. sanctions was "worth it," was treating American GIs as "toy soldiers to be moved around on some global chessboard."

But that is exactly how the Clinton administration later saw NATO peacekeepers in the Balkans, and how the subsequent Bush and Obama administrations treated U.S. forces in the Global War on Terror. 

Powell wasn’t perfect, his decisions and judgement not unassailable for sure. Many will pick apart his record — hawks will say he misjudged Saddam back in the Persian Gulf War, while restrainers will lament his seeming lack of courage to stand up to the Bush Administration over Iraq. But it is worth noting that he was seen, at least in some circles, as a reluctant warrior.

"As an old infantryman, he's willing to get into foxholes when there's a crisis, but he'll do it only in context of a grand strategy, a moral principle and, most of all, an exit strategy," Kenneth M. Duberstein, President Reagan's chief of staff and Powell's closest political adviser, told the Irish Times in 2000. "He picks his battles. And he does nothing halfway measures."

Also noted in the Irish Times article, a quote from the Athenian military historian and general Thucydides, which Powell supposedly kept under the desk glass in his Pentagon office: 

"Of all manifestations of power, restraint impresses men most."


Madeleine Albright and Colin Powell (screenshot CNN Fareed Zakaria GPS)
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi 首相官邸 (Cabinet Public Affairs Office)

Takaichi 101: How to torpedo relations with China in a month

Asia-Pacific

On November 7, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could undoubtedly be “a situation that threatens Japan’s survival,” thereby implying that Tokyo could respond by dispatching Self-Defense Forces.

This statement triggered the worst crisis in Sino-Japanese relations in over a decade because it reflected a transformation in Japan’s security policy discourse, defense posture, and U.S.-Japan defense cooperation in recent years. Understanding this transformation requires dissecting the context as well as content of Takaichi’s parliamentary remarks.

keep readingShow less
Starmer, Macron, Merz G7
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer meets Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and António Costa, President of the European Council at the G7 world leaders summit in Kananaskis, June 15, 2025. Picture by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street

The Europeans pushing the NATO poison pill

Europe

The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined.

While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig
Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Saudi leans in hard to get UAE out of Sudan civil war

Middle East

As Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), swept through Washington last week, the agenda was predictably packed with deals: a trillion-dollar investment pledge, access to advanced F-35 fighter jets, and coveted American AI technology dominated the headlines. Yet tucked within these transactions was a significant development for the civil war in Sudan.

Speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum President Donald Trump said that Sudan “was not on my charts,” viewing the conflict as “just something that was crazy and out of control” until the Saudi leader pressed the issue. “His majesty would like me to do something very powerful having to do with Sudan,” Trump recounted, adding that MBS framed it as an opportunity for greatness.

The crown prince’s intervention highlights a crucial new reality that the path to peace, or continued war, in Sudan now runs even more directly through the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The fate of Sudan is being forged in the Gulf, and its future will be decided by which side has more sway in Trump’s White House.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.