In response to the increasing number of post-Cold War interventions, the Clinton administration conducted a detailed review of American policy to clarify when, why, and how the United States intervenes abroad. One document from the policy review is Presidential Decision Directive 25 (PDD-25), The Clinton Administration's Policy on Reforming Multilateral Peace Operations. This thesis examines the impact of PDD-25 on future intervention decisions, focusing on 'complex emergencies.' Complex emergencies are those cases which defy categorization into the standard military terminology because they require multiple types of missions to respond to a complicated situation involving societal, political, and economic chaos with human suffering. In examining the impact of PDD-25 on these cases, this thesis reviews current concepts concerning both complex emergencies and intervention, compares PDD-25 with recent intervention policies, and analyzes PDD-25 based on the characteristics of sound military doctrine. PDD-25 is an improvement of previous policy but still lacks a detailed appreciation of conducting interventions, especially in complex emergencies. Inconsistencies between PDD-25 and the requirements of intervention exist concerning clarity of national interests: a tendency toward self-deterrence; preclusion of the possibility of early intervention: concerns for international legal precedents; and expectations of short duration, low costs, and absolute impartiality.

ADA 312207 Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)