USA Should Not Be Obligated to Police the World
The United States should NOT be responsible for policing the entire world. Even though the US is the world’s most powerful country it isn’t required that it be involved in the rest of the world and worry about every event, big or small, as the world’s police would need to be.
For as many people who are against the US being responsible for policing the world, there are as many people who are for it. The US spends more on its military than any other country, in 2003 over $400 Billion was spent according to the Military Expenditure Database. Just because they do spend that much shouldn’t mean that they have to focus on acting as the world police. There are more negatives which can result from the US
acting on the behalf of foreign countries throughout the world.
As recently as the War in Iraq, the US has gone to war pushing its own morals and ideals on a country which may or may not want them. Even if it’s not intended, the fact that it happens can’t be denied. When a single country has to act and use its own judgment on acting on other nations, it will ultimately lead to the advantage of no one but that single country. President Bush has been criticized for leading the US into the War in Iraq for what many consider the wrong reasons who lying to the American people for doing so. President Bush cited reasons such as nuclear and biological weapons and genocide has the reasons why Iraq would be invaded. However since then, no weapons have been found and the world looks at the situation as a greedy nation looking to take over one of the largest oil sections of the world.
Instead of a single nation acting on its own as the United States did in March 2003, an international committee should be able to decide. Currently, the United Nations is trying to be that international committee. However, it’s far from being independent as it is largely funded and housed by the United States. Situations of scandals, both financial and social have undermined the power which the UN claims it possesses. As the Honolulu Star-Bulletin suggests, the UN should move its homebase from New York City to the Middle East where it would be better able to focus and work on the large problems that the region has had. The veto power of the Executive Council is also apart of the problems the UN has. If a single nation feels they may not benefit from any international cause, they can simply say no and everything has to change.
If the United States were to be held responsible for policing the world, corruption would quickly arise. When just one entity has that much power or responsible, things can quickly turn from acting in the interests of the world to acting only for your own interests. The United States should be an active member in an international community looking to improve the world, but it shouldn’t be the lone member of a crew who is expected to do so. By itself, the US can’t carry a lot of weight except for its military power on any nation unless it’s a fledgling, undeveloped nation. But as apart of a strong and willing international community, the US along with allies would be able to turn around countries who previously weren’t challenged because of a lack of organization.
If other countries feel that the US is acting only for themselves and against the rest of the international community, it could damage trade relationships and potential allies for any situations which may arise later on. Currently, the United States and France are arguing over their roles in the Darfur region of the Sudan in Africa which is being ravaged by civil war. The US wants NATO to get involved and head the alliance to attempt to help the region. However, France wants NATO to stay away and instead, have European controlled alliances lead the effort of help. Reuters news service reported, “The alliance’s (NATO) involvement would mean further US presence on a continent where former colonial power France is keen to regain strategical influence.” This shows how a couple of countries are trying to do what’s best for them and not necessarily what’s best for the hurting nation of Sudan and its people.
When the United States attempts to police the world on its own, foreign nations usually see it was the big powerhouse trying to use the smaller nations for its own benefit without a care in the world. This type of thinking breeds a new kind of fundamentalist generation who learn from a young age to hate the US because in their mind it is an evil country who has tried to force its way of life into a different country which doesn’t want to be told what to do. Our ethics and morals are widely different then that of the Eastern hemisphere and the clash between them can result in violence and not peace.
The United States acting as the police of the world can be seen in either a positive or negative light. However, it’s negative consequences outweigh the positive benefits that may come from it. Taking order throughout the world is not a bad thing, as long as it is done by an international community and not just one single country. Acting in isolationism isn’t favorable either though because of the large emphasis put on trading, travel and foreign imports which make up a large part of the American economy.
