International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research

Authors
Emimeke Henry Dienye, Elleh Oyoboy Edman

Abstract
The paper did set out to examine the invocation of the pre-emptive war logic and doctrine by the Bush Jr. administration immediately after the September 11, 2001 attack in the United State had continued to resonate in current international system, especially in the era of the new normal. The entire debate over the pre-emptive war doctrine revolves around the legality of the doctrine and what it portends for weaker nations, and nations that are willing to confront the “Adult Supervision” that the United States of America is providing the international system. The doctrine had become a “powerful instrument” used by powerful in cajoling and intimidating weaker nations, with weaker nations attempting to flag the doctrine with little or no success. The doctrine, furthermore, has increased the acceleration of powerful nations away from the multilateral approach of the United Nations (UN) to conflict resolution to the unilateral approach, thus, the questions whether the pre emptive war logic constitute a new normal and (ii) whether the basis of this doctrine goes beyond the new normal. Furthermore, should humankind allow the cajoling of weaker nations? The attempt at proffering answers to the questions did inadvertently led the paper to several conclusions, especially as it concerns the African continent, thus the recommendations canvass herein that includes the global war on terror being better done within the global framework of multilateralism.