Should the US Behave as the World's Policeman - Essay Example

Should the U.S. behave as the worlds policeman? Introduction United s has been interfering with the political and economic infrastructure of many countries of the world. This has proved to be both fruitful and detrimental, depending upon how one looks at it. There are many advantages and disadvantages associated with U.S. being the policeman of the world. On one hand, there is need for a policeman who should supervise the affairs of the world and help enforce peace; but on the other, this hinders with the overall freedom of the nations. This paper describes both points of view, and lists arguments in support of and against the U.S. behavior as the world’s policeman. Arguments For Governments of many countries are facing urgent challenges because of the presence of nuclear weapons in their countries. Terrorism incidents that have been happening in the world, and especially in the United States, like the 9/11 attacks and racist attacks, have raised much concern about the presence of nuclear weapons in some countries. U.S. has been taking actions against many countries, including Iraq and Afghanistan, to stop militancy and terrorism. U.S. is also concerned about the nuclear state of Iran (Historyguy.com, n.d.). This means that there is need for supervision on nuclear weapons, and U.S. is taking care of it very properly. The rise in terrorism has called upon the need for interference of U.S. in other countries’ affairs. Terrorism has started occurring in quite a number of ways. The sophisticated security measures have forced the terrorists to use “more clandestine measures to conceal their identities and evade detection, arrest, and death by security agencies worldwide” (Ali, para.8). Suicide bombing is a new concept, like those that happened in 2003 Istanbul bombing. There are hundreds of other examples of terrorism in many other countries. This calls upon the need of a policeman country, to regulate peace and enforce law. Just like there are councilors, mayors, and country heads for every town and city, there should be a policeman for the whole world too. A policeman means a leader. A leader of a company plays his role in solving conflicts among its workers; ensuring productivity and reputation of the company; and, working within the circle of ethics. In the same way, U.S. should be the world’s policeman to play the role of a mediator, who solves issues between different countries. Without a mediator or a problem-solver, conflicts arise and threaten the world’s peace. Hence, U.S. should play its role as a mediating policeman among the countries of the world. “As long as evil exists, someone will have to protect peaceful people from predators,” states Boot (2003, par.2). U.S. is proud to have a very strong law enforcement system. It has strong laws and regulations for every walk of life and for everybody. For example, there are driving under influence rules in the country, which if broken, the person gets heavily penalized (Chambliss, 2011, p.72). But there are many countries in the world which do not have such rules, due to which there is chaos in the countries. To ensure strong and proper law enforcement, U.S. should play a policeman’s role, so that other countries are afraid of it, and as a result, start enforcing laws in their countries too. There is no doubt that U.S. has got the most sophisticated technology based war tools and equipment (Johnson, 2011), with the help of which it can save good countries from bad ones. Bad countries dread U.S. because of its strong military equipment and financial budget for war, thus, they think twice before disturbing the peace of the world. Hence, U.S. serves as a strong and powerful policeman for the world, since it has the power to save weaker countries and ensure their independence. Arguments Against Being a policeman with every country and entering into wars is a bad strategy because it only disrupts the peace, not only of invaded country but also of U.S., which has already lost the lives of many of its soldiers in military actions against Iraq and Afghanistan. Nouraee (2010, par.10) states that Americans will never tolerate it if the correct number of casualties of American soldiers in the war is revealed to them. War only increases hatred, and encourages the residents of the attacked country to develop rebellious feelings toward U.S. This does not help decrease terrorist attacks, but increases violence and radical hostility. Interfering into matters of countries where people are of the other religion, increases hatred between religions. This fact cannot be denied that since U.S. has attacked Muslim countries in the past, because of the doubted presence of Osama-Bin-Ladin. This has increased detestation among Muslims and Christians, or more specifically, among Islam and Christianity. Human beings have been taught in every religion and testament to respect and love each other, not on the basis of cast, color, creed, language, and religion, but on the basis of humanity. War on terror that U.S. initiated has been called, at many times, Muslim-Christian rioting (Koenig, n.d.). Every country has its own culture, socio-economic status, and political infrastructure. It has its own policies, rules and regulations to maintain discipline in the country. This is called independence, and every country has the right to freedom. U.S. interference in another country’s social, economic, and political situation means that the other country is not free in choice and decisions. This way, the freedom and independence gets compromised. No country will want that its decisions are overpowered by another country. People want to feel independence and free will. U.S. should not be a policeman asking a country to compromise upon its freedom (Swan, 2013). U.S. should allow other countries to progress on their own strength. This will make the countries make efforts in coming at par with the modern world. Just like parents should, sometimes let the children behave as they wish so that they learn what is right and what is wrong; in the same manner, U.S. should allow other countries to make their unique efforts in understanding the need of the time and make efforts accordingly. Interfering all the time has become U.S. policy (Myanmar.com, n.d.), and this will affect the global peace in the end. If U.S. continues to be a policeman, people will start dreading its policies, and this will result in a reduction in immigration. Continuing economic downturn has already put bad effect upon immigration. If U.S. continues to be a policeman, threatening other countries and interfering in their matters, it will have to see decrease in immigration, which is important because immigrants occupy different occupations thus enhancing the already stable economic system (Wvong, 1997). Those who take admissions in reputed universities come out as educated professionals. This also benefits the country’s financial and social structure. Thus, the immigrants also play their part in strengthening the country’s prosperity and social life. Conclusion Putting it all together, U.S. should behave as world’s policeman because there is presence of nuclear weapons in many countries of the world. To save the chance of nuclear war, U.S. supervision is necessary. Also, the increasing terrorism in the world calls upon the need for a policeman who should regulate peace in the countries. U.S. can prove to be a strong leader for the world. It has the power to enforce laws in the countries. Its strong military position is a savior for weak countries. On the other hand, U.S. interference can promote hatred among people and religions. Countries’ freedom will be at stake. Their efforts to survive independently will be reduced. There will be fewer immigrants for U.S. Hence, there are both good and bad points associated with U.S. being the world’s policeman. It depends on how one looks at it. References Ali, F. (2007). Why modern terrorists are different. Contingency Today. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.contingencytoday.com/online_article/Why-modern-terrorists-are-different/161 Boot, M. (2003). America’s policy is to rule the world. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.cfr.org/us-strategy-and-politics/americas-destiny-police-world/p5559 Chambliss, W.J. (2011). Courts, Law, and Justice. USA: SAGE. Historyguy.com. (n.d.). Iran War. Retreived April 2, 2013, from http://www.historyguy.com/iranwar.htm#.T1HIFfHIpDQ Johnson, R. (2011). 11 incredible weapons that only America has. Business Insider. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.businessinsider.com/11-incredible-weapons-that-only-america-has-2011-9?op=1 Koenig, D. (n.d.). Pseudo Christianity and Islam the Holy War Continues. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.thepropheticyears.com/reasons/Islam.HTM Myanmar.com. (n.d.). American Interference in Internal Affairs of Myanmar. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.american-buddha.com/radio.free.am.int.htm Nouraee, A. (2010). How many civilians has the U.S. killed in the war on terror™? Creative Loafing. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://clatl.com/atlanta/how-many-civilians-has-the-us-killed-in-the-war-on-terror/Content?oid=1431775 Wvong, R. (1997). Immigration: Costs and Benefits. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://www.russilwvong.com/immigration.html Swan, T. (2013). Why do so many people hate America? HubPages. Retrieved April 2, 2013, from http://thomasswan.hubpages.com/hub/Why-do-so-many-people-hate-America Read More