Justification strategies for broad domestic coalitions

Abstract Chapter 3 outlines the main argument, explaining how presidents’ widespread use of humanitarian justifications outside of humanitarian interventions is linked to the political benefits of building broad domestic coalitions of support. It details why leaders care about public opinion and explains why leaders should aim to mobilize support from not only a majority of the public but also the broadest possible domestic coalition. Such broad coalitions demand support from both hawks and doves, and humanitarian justifications have the unique power to mobilize doves. The chapter defines doves, hawks, and isolationists, tracking their presence among the US public over time and highlighting the ways in which these categories are distinct from political partisanship. The chapter presents hypotheses for each step of the argument and contrasts its implications against the conventional wisdom that humanitarian claims are either limited in their effectiveness or a problem for holding leaders accountable.