Should the U.S. continue to act as a policeman for other countries?

 

Since the end of the Cold War in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has become the sole global superpower. A consequence has been that it has become the most dominant nation in the world, essentially dictating policy to other countries while at the same time functioning as hegemon in various regions including the Middle East, East Asia, Latin America, and Europe, and being highly influential in the rest (Cossa et al. 5). Therefore, the United States, no matter its position in these regions, has inevitably become and remains the most powerful nation, both militarily and economically, in the world, and has utilized this leverage as a means of having its way. This paper seeks to determine whether the United States should continue to act as a policeman for other countries or whether it should withdraw from this role.

The rise to sole dominance by the United States was seen as a seminal event because it was considered by some scholars as the end of history. There was the belief that it would ensure that there was the promotion of peace and democracy across the world and would create an environment within which it was possible for all nations to live harmoniously together (Lazar and Lazar 321). However, this turned out not to be the case because the predictions that were made concerning global peace under American hegemony did not turn out as expected. This has come to be blamed on the United States’ reluctance to take on its responsibilities as the global hegemon. The failure to consider that the United States has actually done the best that it can has created an environment where it is essentially blamed for the collapse of peace in some parts of the world. There needs to be a contemplation of the manner through which the United States has contributed to global stability in the face of numerous challenges.

One of the most important points that can be made concerning the United States as a global policeman is that no nation has been able to muster the power that it possesses to uphold international law. The United States plays an extremely important role when it comes to the enforcement of international law across the world and it is because of this role that it has been able to make sure that it promotes relative stability in almost all the regions in the world (Etzioni 3). It is noteworthy that the military and economic activities of the United States have allowed it to have leverage over a diversity of nations and groups, with the result being that its presence on the global stage as policeman has essentially kept the world from falling into violence and chaos. It has further allowed for the promotion of a scenario where there is a level of deterrence against belligerent powers.

However, there have been arguments that the United States should only focus on safeguarding its own security and interests. This is especially the case when it comes to the way that it spends billions of dollars in undertaking its foreign policy responsibilities. This money could be better used to settle the diversity of problems that it has domestically and result in a scenario where Americans are better off. Other countries in the world should be allowed to take on the role of policeman, even regionally, because the United States cannot do it all. Instead, because of the overreliance on the United States, the result has been chaos, as seen through the way that strong governance at a global level still does not exist over a quarter a century since the rise of the United States as the sole superpower (Huddleston 4; Vörös 3). Therefore, the United States should pull back and give other nations the opportunity to take on more responsibilities at a global level.

The United States is a necessary part of the global security structure and is therefore best suited to being the global policeman. It is not only the most powerful nation militarily and economically, it is also the most influential country in the world. It has military facilities in a diversity of countries across many regions, which allows for the easy projection of power. Moreover, because it has the capability of maintaining such a large military and has the economic capability to impose sanctions on any country in the world, the United States is best placed to be the global policeman. This is a capability that no other country in the world possesses, which gives the United States the leverage it needs to ensure that it not only promotes its interests, but also secures the rest of the world against threats that might arise.

The United States is the nation best placed to act as the policeman for other countries. It not only has the best capabilities militarily, but it also the world’s largest economy. Furthermore, the leverage that it has over other nations based on strong diplomatic relations has allowed the United States to ensure that it not only achieves the goal of promoting global peace through the projection of power, but it has also ensured that there is the promotion of greater global cooperation. In the process, the United States, as the global hegemon, has been able to preside over a period of considerable global peace that has made it possible for global economic and regional integration to become a reality; greatly benefiting the peoples of the world.

Has globalization has undermined America’s working-class

 

·   Globalization has undermined the American working class through wage reduction and upward mobility, as well as damaging international policy decisions.

o   Globalization has brought in an era of border fluidity, free trade, and an extremely high level of profits for corporations.

§  For the beneficiaries of globalization, it is an act that has allowed for the integration of the global economy to such an extent that it has created an environment within which considerable wealth has been generated in addition to benefits to consumers and workers around the world.

§  For the American worker, globalization has become one of the biggest disasters, including the loss of jobs on an unprecedented scale. A

o   The American economy has had small income gains because of globalization.

§  As a whole, it has created a scenario where there is a reduction of wages and upward mobility in society (Mahutga, Roberts, & Kwon, 2017). The damage caused has been especially widespread among the working class to such an extent that it has made it more difficult for the members of this group to compete with others across the world.

§  A consideration of the downward pressure on wages shows that it has not been in favor of the working class and has instead made life extremely difficult for individuals, especially in the manufacturing sector due to offshoring (Smith, 2012). This process has therefore overshadowed the benefits of globalization and shows that the latter may not be as good for everybody as it seems.

§  Globalization has amplified the making of damaging international policy decisions. The latter has come about mainly because of the influence of corporations, which has resulted in policies that are mainly beneficial to them in terms of profits (Flew, 2018). The signing of trade agreements has led to a situation where American workers do not have the ability to have economic leverage, and instead, they are at the mercy of large corporations (Lenox & Arsht, 2018).

§  These entities, because of the considerable influence that they wield in the new order, have been able to tilt the balance of power towards themselves rather than workers (Gaston, 2002); essentially eroding the power, which unions once had in the protection of workers. Workers do not have the power to prevent the losses of manufacturing jobs from going to other countries because of the lower wages that they offer. In this way, American workers have been forced to accept depressed wages as a means of maintaining their jobs and in some cases even that has not saved them from losing their jobs to offshoring.

§  Globalization has proven to be a situation that has hurt the American working class. The damage that it has done to their living standards has become so significant that it has become essential to consider remedies. Among these should be the acknowledgement of the damage caused to wages and jobs and the need to ensure that these workers are compensated appropriately.

§  There should be a stoppage of the pursuit of harmful international trade agreements that cause problems to the working class, and by extension, a majority of American society.

§  It is necessary to make sure that there is the promotion of policies that are beneficial for the entire population rather than just for those that own capital. This can be done through the harmonization of national policies in a manner that spearheads the needs of the working class in society, including the institution of international policies that tax capital more effectively.

The concept of blame and responsibility

 

Making judgments concerning whether an individual is responsible for a certain behavior or event is a fundamental aspect of the relationships that individuals have with one another in society. This is especially the case when it comes to the relationship between members of a society and their leaders (Williams, 2003). Blame and responsibility are therefore fundamental and familiar parts of the moral practices of any society and they will often end up determining the way that relationships between individuals are conducted. This paper considers the concept of blame and responsibility in the context of crisis management.

One of the most important aspects of blame and responsibility is that there is the judgment of an individual based on their behavior. This is done through individuals essentially undertaking to attribute certain capacities to a person. In this way, the judgment is based on whether the individual involved has been able to exercise their capabilities effectively and in a morally responsible manner. For example, the way that the second Bush administration handled its two major crises, namely the 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina, were important bases for the allocation of blame and responsibility (Hart et al., 2009). The actions that were taken by this administration were highly significant because they allowed the public to judge it based on its performance. These crises can therefore be considered viable example of the way that the concept of blame and responsibility can be applied.

There are a number of ways through which blame can be allocated. These are based on the way that the individual in authority handles the situation or crisis at hand. The first address made by President Bush soon after 9/11 is an example of the way that he managed to take control of the situation in stride and therefore avoid blame and take responsibility as the leader of the nation (Woodward, 2012, p. 1). He presided over a highly effective emergency response operation that provided him with considerable support from all sectors of society. This was demonstrated through the lack of criticism from all parts of media; right, left, or center. Furthermore, despite his initial bewilderment following his learning the news of the attacks, the made sense of the situation and took a proactive approach when it came to the way that government responded to it through effective coordination and decision making. He further took responsibility through the making of meaning of the situation as he framed a narrative concerning the crisis and how best to respond to it (Landy, 2004).

However, when dealing with crises, it is important to ensure that attribution errors are overcome. Attribution errors come about because of the biases that individuals have so that when things take a positive turn, they are attributed as having come about internally, while negative events are blamed on external actors (Rahimi et al., 2016). Thus, while Bush had received considerable praise for his handling of the 9/11 crisis, the same was not the case with Katrina, which saw him become the target of harsh public condemnation. His leadership during this crisis was seen as lacking of initiative and responsibility. He was therefore blamed for the disastrous emergency response that came about as a result. This shows a need to be aware of and avoid the biases the come with attribution errors so that they can be overcome.

Blame and responsibility is a concept that has been demonstrated through a consideration of the Bush administration’s response to 9/11 and Katrina. It shows the way that biases play an important role in their attribution. Therefore, there is the need to ensure that there is the attainment of a level of consciousness concerning how individuals will often behave when assigning blame or praise for actions.