24 e lusive v ictories
war goals he has established, and remain vigilant that how the military
fi ghts the war advances goals rather than undermining them.
Th e president also acts as the nation’s diplomatic leader. Wars test
presidential diplomacy. Military confl icts occur in an international
system that contains other states and (increasingly, as I’ve pointed out)
non-state actors. For both military and political reasons, presidents may
seek military allies or coalition partners. In the confrontation over
Kuwait in 1990–1991, George H.W. Bush enlisted the participation of
several Arab nations in the UN coalition to neutralize the perception in
the Middle East that the West was waging a war on Islam. Even when
presidents have not sought international help in a confl ict, they need to
attend to diplomacy, especially to inhibit other states from intervening
when the United States prefers to resolve a confl ict on its own. Hence,
a fi fth task for a president at war: to pursue diplomacy that advances his
political goals. Th e diplomatic side gains importance in confl icts in
which the United States operates within (and, as a rule, dominates) a
coalition structure.
Leading a nation at war also poses political challenges at home. Th e
military chain of command leads directly from the president through
senior uniformed offi cers to the lowest-ranking soldier or sailor. When
necessary, a president can issue an order. Not so on the domestic or
civilian side; there, the president must pursue wartime goals in the
framework of wartime politics. Despite presidential calls for unity and
pledges of support from other political actors at the outset of a confl ict,
wars do not stop political strife. Th e opposite has often proven to be the
case. Many wars, from the War of 1812 to the Iraq War, have provoked
strident opposition. Add to this the stubborn reality that conventional
politics continues, if temporarily (and usually briefly) submerged
beneath a rhetoric of common purpose. A president may wish to be seen
as leader of a nation at arms, but he is also the head of a political party,
and that involves a range of interests and demands. Further, wars unleash
or accelerate economic changes, enrich some while possibly impover-
ishing others, uproot people, and unsettle social roles. Simply put, wars
remake politics. What Americans debate at the end of a war often is
quite diff erent from what stirred them when it began. After the Civil
War, the country argued about civil rights, protective tariff s, and cur-
rency issues; World War I generated controversies over the enforcement