United We Stand; Divided We Fall Why Appropriate U.S. Intervention in Foreign Policy is a Necessity for Global Peace

In recent times it has become clear that trust of the United States’ ability to foster and produce peace is at an all-time low. In fact, it has recently been reported by The New York Post that a Gallup poll which analyzed data collected from 66,000 people polled in 65 countries that the U.S. is considered to be more threatening to peace efforts than Pakistan, Iran, and China combined, “Of the 66,000 people polled, just under a quarter named Uncle Sam as the greatest threat to world peace,” (New York Post, 2014). While this data sheds a frightening light upon the global opinion of the U.S.’s ability to act as successful peacekeepers, and due to many of the blunders experienced during Bush’s presidency, it is understandable as to why faith in the U.S. has diminished. However, both recent and historical data points towards the contrary, and instead has shown the importance of U.S. intervention in maintaining peace and showing the world that violations of human rights will not be tolerated. Therefore appropriate U.S. intervention within certain foreign policies is a necessity for global peace.
Due to the U.S. maintaining one of the world’s largest militia in non-war times it is imperative that the United States’ military be involved in global efforts to foster and maintain peace when necessary. Many countries do not have the capability to defend themselves and the U.S. can aid these countries by using its quite expansive military power. Currently the U.S. supports a military of over 1.4 million trained individuals (U.S. Department of Defense, 2014). Recent struggles between Chinese and Japanese forces have only highlighted how important it is for the U.S. military to maintain its global presence. In fact, U.S. intervention within the developing Asian continent as a whole is necessary for the region to maintain peace. Overall it has been noted that without the presence of the U.S. military within Asia that tensions amongst Asian nations would lead to catastrophic events,
“The situation underscores why the U.S. needs to maintain a robust naval and air force presence in Asia: because it keeps all the regional powers — rising, declining or otherwise — from escalating a crisis into a conflagration. Treaties and trade help ameliorate the jagged regional political dynamics, but American hard power on the seas and in the air is what keeps tensions from rising to a fever pitch,” (Peritz, 2013).
In addition to this modern example of the need for the United States’ powerful influence to maintain peace in Asia, there are historical ones as well. Both the Korean War, as well as the Australian, New Zealand, and United States Security Treaty (ANZUS) show how U.S. military and policy intervention within foreign affairs helped to maintain global peace. The Korean conflict (1950-1953) saw the need for further intervention in order for the country of Korea to function. Prior to WWII Korea had been a Japanese territory and as part of post-war agreements it had been mandated that Japanese territories would defer back to their prior rule. However, conflicting viewpoints on the part of Korean nationalists soon led to violence and need for global interventions. The U.S. lent the most military forces to the Korean conflict (The U.S. Department of State, 2014). While the country split and remained separated the U.S. managed to protect and enforce NATO interests and defended the still crippled Japan from attack. Even so it was a bittersweet victory due to the permanent separation of North and South Korea. However, by supporting South Korean interests the U.S. ensured that a peaceful nationalist South Korea came to be, rather than merging it with the greatly despaired and oppressed North Korean communist forces. In addition, overall U.S. defense measures in Asia were strengthened which have allowed the U.S. to aid Asia in its peace maintaining endeavors. ANZUS is a peace policy that was adopted amongst the U.S., New Zealand, and Australia as a regional peacekeeping measure. ANZUS was never truly expanded upon, however it lead to the development of further important peacekeeping documents,
“Although ANZUS was never expanded, the 1954 creation of the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) included all of the ANZUS powers, as well as Britain, France, and several other Asian powers, eliminating the impetus to change the foundation of the ANZUS Treaty. Over the course of the decades that followed the signing of the ANZUS Treaty, the members met annually to discuss their shared interests and concerns,” (U.S. Department of State, 2014).
The power held by the U.S. as a global superpower can be directly seen in its important involvement within many peacekeeping and peace promoting treaties and documents such as ANZUS and SEATO. In addition ANZUS was basically absorbed into the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) and therefore its importance continued on. The U.S. has a strong history of supporting global communication, sharing, and networking. It is this communicative power the U.S. has which furthers the need for it to be globally involved within foreign policy for peace. The U.S. already has expansive experience with foreign policy and peace measures and that experience is necessary for the furthering of positive global relations.
In addition to the duty of the U.S. to use its militia in order to maintain and promote peace, it is also the responsibility of the U.S. as a global leader in nuclear and chemical weapons production to ensure safety measures are preserved. Due to the increase in the development of potentially catastrophic weapons of mass destruction ensuring global safety measures are developed and are maintained is a necessity that the U.S. should be involved in. The recent Syrian crisis only points towards the dangers of chemical and nuclear warfare and how badly the world needs a superpower such as the U.S. to prevent these biological and chemical atrocities from happening.
The Syrian crisis saw a devastating use of harmful chemical weapons and subsequently constituted a mass violation of human rights. It has been reported that,
“More than 100,000 people have been killed in Syria… there is something uniquely dangerous about the introduction of chemical weapons. Horrified by the effects of chemical weapons in the battlefield, nations have come together over the years to develop international bans on nerve gases, blister agents, blood agents and choking agents,” (Ghitis, 2013).
Like the quote states, many nations have come together to discuss the horrors and atrocities that chemical weapons pose, however without intervention and the intimidation it causes then countries such as Syria will not have a reason to refrain from using these weapons against others as well as their own people. The world must understand that committing those horrible acts and abominations will not be tolerated, and it is the duty of the U.S. to ensure that message is received. The usage of chemical weapons is a direct violation of human rights. As the world’s foremost superpower it is the responsibility of the U.S. as well as all other countries to take part in ensuring that global ethics and human rights are not violated. By doing so the U.S. will take part in ensuring global peace measures have a positive effect on human relations and rights as a whole. While the case is strong for the United States’ to maintain an active policy of intervention within foreign policy when necessary for peacekeeping, it should not be confused as an argument for giving the U.S. complete global policing powers. It is not the job, nor the right, of the U.S. to impose its own personal viewpoints and beliefs upon the world, and doing so would constitute extreme abuse. Rather, the U.S. should intervene only when necessary, and only with the goal of ensuring that global peace is maintained and that violations of ethics and human rights do not occur. The following quote administered by President Barack Obama perfectly sums up the level of intervention and influence the U.S. should exert,
"Terrible things happen across the globe, and it is beyond our means to right every wrong," he said. "But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act. That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional," (Blake & Sullivan, 2013).
As the President says, what makes the U.S. exceptional is that is has the ability and duty to act when necessary. The President is on pointe when he says that terrible things happen and the U.S. cannot right every wrong. However, there are many global wrongs the U.S. can, and should, right. That is what this paper is advocating, not total United States’ police power, but an appropriate exertion of global influence for a better world.
In conclusion, the U.S. should not use its power and status to police the world, but instead should use its influence in order to help create a more sustainable, ethical, and peaceful world. Historical and current examples such as U.S. presence in the Pacific as well as current examples of foreign atrocities only further support the need for a strong U.S. military and policy presence globally. It cannot be denied that research has shown how the U.S. has acted in the world’s best interest on multiple occasions. Current opinion of U.S. intervention is low, and by showing the world how important it is to the U.S. to maintain peace and global prosperity global opinion will only rise. It is time that the U.S. reclaim its positive global opinion that was tarnished by the Bush Administration and show the world that the United States truly cares about global peace and prosperity. As a leading superpower the U.S. must show the world how seriously it takes its duty to promote peace and to protect human rights. Too many atrocities occur all around the world, including in our own backyards on a daily basis. While the United States cannot solve every problem, nor should it be expected to, it can seek to support a safer and more peaceful world for all global citizens. And that is a world our children, our children’s children, our neighbor’s children, and all children whether poor, rich, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, white, black, Latino, Asian, or other should be left to inhabit. That is a world worth protecting.
Words: 1,710

Works Cited:

Blake, A., & Sullivan, S. (2013). Team america no longer wants to be the world's police. The
Washington Post, Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/13/team-america-no-longer-wants-to-be-the-worlds-police/

Department of Defense, (2014). About the department of defense. Retrieved from website: http://www.defense.gov/about/

Editorial Department (2014). U.S. is the greatest threat to world peace. The New York Post,
Retrieved from http://nypost.com/2014/01/05/us-is-the-greatest-threat-to-world-peace-poll/

Ghitis, F. (2013). 5 reasons the u.s. must intervene in syria.CNN, Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/opinion/ghitis-syria-intervention/

Peritz, A. (2013). Keeping the peace in asia. U.S. News, Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/12/10/the-american-military- must-keep-the-peace-between-china-japan-and-south-korea

U.S. Department of State, Office of the Historian (2014).Milestones 1945-1952. Retrieved from website: http://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/anzus