Should the U.S. intervene to prevent or end violations of human rights (including genocide) in foreign countries when these violations do not directly affect other American interests?
The United States is a growing global power and presence. Most other countries are not. We are often called upon to engage in conflict situations like preventing violations of human rights and genocide. Intervening only where our national interest is concerned would only bring about negative reactions, which could undermine our effectiveness and especially our international credibility. Therefore, the U.S. should seek to intervene in and prevent violations of human rights not only where we have other interests but in most other
…show more content…
should intervene whether national interest are involved or not because this will continue to ensure that the U.S. plays a major role in shaping other countries foreign policy and remaining a key player in world politics. Editor and Author, Robert Kagan maintains in his book, “American Power – A guide for the perplexed” that American “national interests” need to be interpreted broadly to take into account the country’s position as world leader.
Intervening only where our interests are involved will make other countries suspicious in their dealings with the U.S. in most other aspects. If countries realize that the U.S. intervenes only when American national interest is involved, they might become hostile to U.S. advances because they might think the U.S. wants to gain something from them. In short, other countries would regard us as a selfish country, only concerned with human rights internally and concerned with where we can gain externally. Acting only where our national interest are concerned may open up opportunities for endless frivolous complaints to be lodged against the United States as a global power and presence.
Lastly, if U.S. intervention in the prevention of human rights is based solely on other American interests, our world today will be a “world of crisis”, so to speak, because such crimes as genocide, crimes against humanity, violations of human rights and humanitarian law would be much more commonplace and no
Over the course of history, the United States has a reputation of getting involved with other nations to sort out disputes, arguments, conflicts, wars, etc. One specific example of U.S. Military Involvement is the 1980 El Salvador Civil War. The El Salvador Civil War was a civil war that lasted from 1980 to about 1992. The war slowly arose due to little uprisings in society, promises to improve economy and lifestyles that were never fulfilled, and the push of communism beliefs onto the people who didn’t believe in them. The U.S. Military would not get involved unless their is a violation of human rights, or if mankind is being put into harm's way. The U.S. involved themselves in the Civil War of El Salvador because they had enough evidence and support for specific claims, had the appropriate authority, and fought for an outcome that suited the needs of humanity.
Throughout American history the U.S has tried to stay out of national disputes but sometimes it is necessary for them to take action. In all the wars ever fought in the world only two have been fought on U.S soil and one of the wars was between our own country(Civil War).
The United States has been a super power for decades, and since America has always involved themselves in other countries' problems. Instead of isolationism, the country has practiced getting involved. Since the Monroe Presidency, America has been named the World's police force. Dispelling anarchists, and stopping coos, the united states portrays itself as the world protector. Since Monroe, some Americans have felt that isolation is the way to go, and most feel that it is our right to offer assistance. Two recent incidents, Operation Desert Storm and The War in Bosnia have allowed the United States to show off it's strength, both on the military and political level. It has also given the chance for America to evaluate it's foreign policy,
In both history and present day, many human rights violations have occurred in countries residing within the UN. Despite the attempts that international influence created through the UN, many countries such as the Soviet Union conducted serious human rights violations through attempts to quell uprisings or anti-government movements. Even in the present day, countries such as North Korea and China have been committing drastic human rights violations, despite existing within the United Nations. Because of these facts, it can be concluded that international influence does not necessarily create better human
For years America has been seen as the world’s hero swooping in and saving the day from foreign bad guys, or at least that’s America sees itself as. To many other countries however America is often seen as the world’s bully or just a nuisance. The United States has had many positive impacts on the world and those seem to over shadow the large number of negative impacts it has imposed as well. The world has been changed by the U.S. in both positive and negative ways, and this is due to the alternating use of internationalism and isolationism. Throughout the United States’ existence both foreign polices have existed, but rarely have them been used at the came time. In the present day the U.S. has mainly focused on internationalism. This has
American foreign policy relates to what is done in foreign countries by the United States of America. The foreign policies include controlling of the governments of foreign countries or setting some rules in those countries. The foreign policy of America has always been changing all through the US existence. The changes have stemmed from the dynamics of exogenous and substantial influences of watershed up to the international system and also the effects and changes of endogenous inside the government of the United States. Outstanding assertions like the policies of Monroe, intercontinental encounters such as the Second World War, War of the Spanish and Americans, and the cold war and also conflicts that were termed as local including the Korean War and the Vietnam War considerably shaped the American foreign policy (Kissinger et al., 1969).
Now the US has policies to keep the foreign adversaries of human rights in check, such as: Holding governments accountable to their obligations under universal human rights norms and international human rights instruments. Promoting greater respect for human rights, including freedom from torture, freedom of expression, press freedom, women 's rights,
Imagine living in a world where your own homeland is under attack and you can’t rely on any other parts of the world to send you help. There are a multitude of reasons as to why we urgently need the interventionism policy in the United States. One of the biggest reasons would be while the Holocaust was occurring in Germany we were well aware about it, but didn’t come to intervene until it was too late. Along with this, another reason would be to maintain the allies that we have. Although the United States needs to consider the financial and human costs, overall it should follow a foreign policy of interventionism when it’s necessary to prevent humanitarian catastrophe and to maintain our allies.
National interests are usually the main consideration for the U.S. foreign policy, which can divide into two different parts. First, to protect and prevent American people from any kind of attack, which is the most important and commonly agreed unanimously. Second, helping and maintaining the operation of the U.S. government. To ensure that the interests of national development are not being compromised, Untied States have more aggressively policy to protect its national interests. Some people believe the “the U.S. will use unrivaled military power to further the global counterterrorism movement and democracy as the core goal of foreign policy. Furthermore, the U.S. hopes that all countries and societies can choose the most advantageous political and economic system to themselves independently, to help those countries which have been used as safe haven by terrorism organizations to get rid of the chaos caused by war and poverty.”
The U.S. foreign policy was first established around the early 1900’s.This foreign policy was created in order to maintain a balance of power among nations and it is also the government’s strategy in interacting with foreign nations. America’s policy has been changing over time reflecting the change in its national interest. For Example, as a new nation after the Revolutionary War the U.S. wanted to maintain its independence from more powerful European Countries. During the time periods of 1898 to 1908 the U.S. was dealing with various problems with other countries such as wanting to take control of Hawaii. By the year 1899 the U.S. was involved in its first war in Asia. Three more follow in the course of the next century they were Japan,
It is well known that the United States have been seen internationally as a key actor, for better or worse, when it comes to the field of universal human rights. At the same time, recent events have shown a disassociation between the words and actions of the nation. Despite the fact that these rights are supposed to be constitutionally-protected, the United States has been criticized for repeatedly violating them not only in the past but in recent memory: criminalization of poverty and homelessness, violation of the privacy of citizens all over the world, racism, police brutality, the prison-for-profit system, mistreatment or even torture of the prisoners. These are just some examples of the most common forms of human rights violations
Should the United States enter into military intervention in foreign countries for humanitarian reason? Why? Why not? Under what conditions should the U.S. intervene if at all?
The US has always been a democracy country and a role model for other countries who view the US as a great country.In order to keep that reputation up US should not have intervention with foreign conflicts.President Donald Trump authorized an airstrike of an airfield in Syria. The purpose of this strike was, in part, to punish the Assad regime for using chemical weapons against its own people, and is the latest example of the US getting involved in a foreign conflict.This can lead to another war if US intervenes with foreign conflicts that they don't have to deal with.
The United States, it seems, serves as the unofficial international police. We attempt to impose our views on the world and then correct anyone that strays from our “status quo”. Through our diplomatic actions, America tries to preserve our national beliefs in exchange for the deterioration of another country’s. We were formed by the “global forces” who were attempting to create a global empire, but once we became our own nation, we became one of those forces (197).
The United Nations is widely regarded and respected as the most powerful institution that promotes international cooperation and human rights action. In theory, actions implemented by and within the United Nations are based on the mutual global goal of protecting international human rights and preventing human sufferings. These actions are constituted through three main mechanisms: the Treaty-based system, the Human Rights Council, and Security Council and Humanitarian Interventions, with the level of confrontation and seriousness in each mechanism increases respectively. While aimed to serve the mutual goal of protecting human rights over the world and have shown some successes, in a world of sovereignty, actions when implemented are in fact grounded by the national interests of each state, including embracing its national sovereignty, concreting its strategic relationships with other states, and enhancing its reputation in the international community. This paper will analyze the successes and failures of each of the three mechanisms of the United Nations regime, through which it aims to prove that when it comes to actions, states focus more on their national, and in some cases, regional interests than on the mutual goal of strengthening human rights throughout the world, thus diminishing the legitimacy of the whole United Nations system.