Both questions must be answered with 150 to 200 word response and have at least one reference:
1. Compare and contrast the issues and conditions under which the US formed and led coalitions in invading Iraq in1990/91 and 2002/03. What do you think accounts for the significant differences in the ability of the US to form a coalition for intervention? How did the justification for war rely on both power (hegemonic enforcement of "rules") and the nature of the state (representative democracy vs. Arab authoritarian/terrorist connection) rationales? What mechanisms or processes lent themselves to facilitate the construction of a coalition to intervene?
2. In the case of Libya, how did the administration articulate the rationale that leading from behind would achieve US interests? Does leading from behind complicate or simplify negotiations and the usual role/attitude/options of US policy makers and diplomats? Did expansion of the United Nations Security Council mandate on the Libyan intervention have any impact on the coalition building effort or execution of the operation?