So called failed states that don't provide their citizens with basic rights and protections are a problem for everyone. No matter what regions of the world they are located in, they disrupt economic activities, create border security issues, refugee problems, and can result in bloody civil war. It was only until these once irrelevant, failed states began facilitating terrorist cells that major powers, like the U.S. paid attention.
Now, it is true that some purely humanitarian missions have taken place in conflict regions, but it is hard for elected officials to justify soldiers dying without just cause. This is exactly what happened in Somalia in 1993. The U.S. mission's P.R. manager was seemingly out to lunch when footage of American soldiers being dragged through the streets was broadcast. In this situation, even the most seasoned campaign managers couldn’t put a positive spin on that.
But is it justifiable to say we don’t want our men and women involved in domestic crisis across the world? The Westphalian principles of sovereignty that have governed the established system for centuries would say if it does not directly concern your nation and its strategic interests than you have no rights to meddle. I say that’s a load of crap. We, the safe, fed, and peaceful bystanders have the responsibility to ensure the protection of those whose safety has been taken from them.
Yes, there are controversies as to who should be the ones entering these conflict zones. Should it be the African Union, the European Union, NATO, single nations, or U.N. peacekeeping missions? To address that issue is to be an international relations student, and let's be honest, not everyone is or wants to put the effort into tackling such grand issues.
I believe adamantly that it is not enough to stand by during humanitarian crisis with the attitude that it concerns them not us. It is deplorable for intergovernmental agencies like the U.N. to hesitate labeling a crisis a genocide simply for the fact that it obligates the organization and its members to act. I think an official policy of "waiting it out" is shameful and embarrassing. Think of it this way, if your safety was not guaranteed and you saw no end in sight to violence, pain, and suffering, who would come save you?
2 comments:
I agree, for the most part, that for the United States to stand by while atrocities such as genocide and mass killings take place throughout the world is more than not ok. But, I feel as though you forget that there is much more to the story when it comes to going to stop a genocide, or help aid in a humanitarian crisis.
We, the United States, have been designated the global policeman of the world, and as a result, the global community looks to us first in a time of crisis to provide management, solutions, and aid. The problem is, we have extended a helping hand so much so over the last twenty five years that we have put our own nation at risk both financially, and physically. The U.S. is more in debt than we have ever been, and if you have been following the recent American market, you will obviously know how much our economy is suffering. Stocks are the lowest they have been in years, and the real estate market has plummeted, not to mention the country's morale.
In addition, we entered Afghanistan , Iraq, and a plethora of other countries where the "people were oppressed by a dictator" to "free" the people of their oppressors. What we must recognize in the twenty first century is that by invading a country, region, or territory and "freeing" a group, the oppressors turn to the U.S. with hate, and transform their previous non-democratic ways of life into hate and willingness to do anything to bring destruction to the U.S.
This has gone on for too long, and as a result, an "evil global corporation" of oppressors has been formed against the United States and are (and have been) attacking our economy and homeland in more ways than one and will only continue to do so. We need to put our country back on the map economically before we can continue to spend billions of dollars on wars that we just can't afford. If there is a genocide in turkey, are we just supposed to place ourselves further and further in debt? We can't anymore! we have borrowed and borrowed so much that the validity , stability, and safety of our own economy, land, citizens, and reputation, has been called into question.
I am not saying we do not have a duty to prevent innocent people from being massacred, but what must not walk around with an air of superiority calling the U.S.'s hesitation to engage in sensitive foreign policy situations "a load of crap." We are currently faced with a time of uncertainty in our own country, and it is important for us to come together and recognize that the rest of the world does not view the U.S. as they did twenty-five years ago, let alone 5 years ago, and must demand that we 'fix' our global portfolio before we become entrenched in debt, un-defendable terrorism, and a nation split in two.
I appreciate the comments made about my blog, and there are a few things that I would like to mention in response. Yes, the U.S. is looked at as "Big Brother" to the rest of the world because of our military might. We are pulled in a thousand directions militarily and financially to such an extreme that it would be senseless to try and help in all situations. To do so would be tantamount to complete and utter failure.
However,I do have a few qualms about the suggestion that the U.S.' current engagements and financial situation that it from contributing to international efforts in unstable regions.
I am no proponent for careless military action. I feel that our men and women in the military are valuable assets and to hastily enter high risk situations is irresponsible and unacceptable. The disconnect between a situation such as Darfur and Iraq/Afghanistan is that the premise for becoming involved was not humanitarian reasons. We became engaged in Afghanistan as a direct result of the attacks on September 11. It is safe to say that in Iraq our pre-emptive strikes, based on removing one of your so called "evil corporate oppessors", had very little international clout.
On the economic front, yes, the U.S. is heading into recession,and it is bringing other economies with it. But let me ask you this: how long has there been genocide in Darfur? The U.S. has not been in its current economic straits since 2003 when the conflict began, so to correlate our temporal position with humanitarian crisis that are ongoing is a bit shortsighted.
Post a Comment