There have been numerous examples in the history of humanity when a certain state played a leading role in the international policy dictating its demands to others and determining the evolution of the world and society at the current stage of their development. Traditionally these states were characterized by a serious economic, military and political power and this fact served as the guaranty of their further dominance and evolution. At the same time, the history also proves that all empires that are based on military force and world dominance are doomed to collapse. The involvement in the majority of global events, the usage of military power to solve some problematic issues, economic assistance or pressure that are considered the part of the policy of interventionism obviously demand numerous resources. In this regard, the adherence to this policy undermines a states well-being and results in its gradual degradation. Roman, British and other Empires might be taken as a good evidence to this statement. However, the lust for power remains one of the basic peoples instincts which means that there will always be attempts to play the dominant role in the global policy and be a super-state. In the modern world, we could observe the US desire to preserve its position and remain the most influential actor, and it also preconditions the great topicality of the opposition isolationism vs. interventionism.
Having appeared in consequence of the War of Independence and separated from the British Empire, the USA soon became one of the biggest and the most powerful states. Besides, the first stages of its evolution could be characterized by the isolationism. Being too weak and suffering from numerous internal problems, the country had to create the efficient state machine to use numerous natural resources that were found on its territory. The decades of evolution resulted in the Civil War, rise of civil movements, development of the economy, and, finally, the US increased role on the international level. Since the 20th century, the state had become one of the most influential agents in the world politics which power allowed it to impact the majority of important processes and events. The USA started to reconsider its role and priorities, creating the background for the exploration of interventionism. Finally, the WWII, its results, and the creation of the bipolar world characterized by the opposition of two super-states and their allies known as the Cold War resulted in the total adherence to this policy. The USA became a state that took part in all events that impacted the international relations.
The end of the Cold War and collapse of the USSR conditioned the increase of the US power and its becoming the only super-state. The US interventionism reached a peak as its actions were not opposed. Being one of the main tools that helped to reach its aims, NATO supported every decision accepted by the congress and the President. It resulted in the appearance of the idea of the US unique role in the preservation of the existing word order that, in its turn, justified the states interference in the majority of global events and conflicts. Moreover, having proclaimed itself the main defender of the democracy, the USA also attempted to preserve its security in the majority of regions all over the world. However, these actions could not but trigger the growth of dissatisfaction with the doctrine. The state was often blamed for the fomenting conflicts to protect its own interests and enrich (Patton, 2016). Moreover, a chain of unpopular military conflicts that resulted in the significant deterioration of the situation in different regions and appearance of the terrorist threat conditioned numerous appeals to reconsider the US policy and limit its interference in the domestic policy of various states. Thus, the most important fact is that these appeals come both from other states and from the citizens of the USA who are unsatisfied with the current policy.
One of the main reasons for the increased level of dissatisfaction is the great price the state pays for the preservation of its leading role. At the moment, the USA has the greatest external bond debt which is about $19 trillion (Patton, 2016). This giant sum is spent to support its military bases and presence in various regions, help friendly governments or to organize revolutions and protests in states which act in the way inappropriate for the USA. That is why the state is characterized by the greatest donations to the military sector. In this regard, interventionism costs a lot for the country. However, there are also numerous victims as hundreds of soldiers die in those conflicts. All these facts introduce the question whether the price paid for the US dominance could be considered too high or not. In this regard, the appeals to stop the policy of interventionism and focus on the domestic problems and internal questions become more and more insistent.
Therefore, the chain of serious problems in the sphere of economy and world financial crisis preconditioned the necessity to think about the further perspectives and the way the USA could overcome these difficulties. For this reason, the existing US policy was considered inefficient by a certain group of people. The opponents of interventionism insisted that the sums spent on military affairs and provision of support to loyal governments are spent in vain as the USA has a number of its own problems that should be solved immediately (Clarke, 2004). This tendency has acquired great popularity as according to the latest surveys, more than 35 % of the citizens of the USA doubt the aptitude of the existing policy and its beneficial impact on the states evolution (Clarke, 2004). Moreover, residents are not sure that the USA should preserve the interventionism and interfere in the majority of global events as it does not guarantee the states further growths and rise. Yet, the alteration of the attitude to the US role and interventionism could be traced resting on the change of peoples mentality and social opinion during the military conflicts in which the state took part.
Nevertheless, the WW II could be considered the background for the boost of the US international power and its becoming one of the leading forces. The global character of the war preconditioned the engagement of the majority of existing states and the appearance of two opposing camps. Belonging to the side which won, the USA also obtained numerous benefits. Moreover, the main military operations took part on the territory of the USSR, Europe, and Africa. In such a way, the USA managed to avoid devastations and preserved its industrial capacity. Additionally, the state served as the main supplier for its allies, and this fact contributed to the rise of the industrial sector. Being one of the winners, the USA empowered its positions and turned into the super-state that was considered the only power that could deter the USSRs aggression. At that period of time, the attitude to the reconsideration of the US role and adherence to interventionism was understandable. The society experienced the great patriotic uplift and citizens were proud that their state became one of the most influential ones in the world. Additionally, the existence of the potential threat that came from the ideological opponent also preconditioned the approval of the existing course.
Furthermore, strained relations with the USSR and the rise of the Cold war resulted in the necessity to increase the US power and acquire new allies. Under these conditions, the further exploration of interventionism seemed the only possible way of the states evolution. Both the USSR and the USA had their spheres of influence and tried to gain new partners. That is why they interfered in the domestic policies of strategic partners in different regions. Insurrections, organized revolutions, and other civil movements were the main tools used by the opposing countries. In this regard, the state had to have enough power to be able to preserve its interests in a certain region. Having proclaimed itself as the defender of democracy, the USA was obliged to act in an appropriate way, and Americans were proud of the role they played in the world. That period of time could also be characterized by the rallying of society and the existence of the only perspective on its further rise.
These facts preconditioned the further increase of the US power and its desire to take part in all conflicts that might influence the power balance in the world. Since that period of time, the USA was a constant participant of all military conflicts and revolutions in different parts of the planet. It either sponsored or provided security assistance to potential allies. Due to the propaganda and increased attention devoted to the ideology, the USSR was taken as the Evil Empire, and Americans felt obliged to resist it. The rapid rise of the interventionism also preconditioned the increased spending and victims. The majority of the great conflicts of that period of time happened because of the clash of interests of the super-states that wanted to preserve their dominance and remain powerful. People felt their belonging to opposite camps and were ready to contribute to the strengthening of their state and its further rise.
Korean war became the first great military conflict that resulted from the clash of two super-states and the US adherence to the interventionism. The civil conflict in Korea was used as the reason for the military interference, and the USA sent its troops to the region. President Truman proclaimed support to Korean Government army to be the main priority and the whole civilized world, United Nations and the USA became involved (Truman, 1950). This war was controversial as its results could hardly satisfy the main participants. However, it should be used to demonstrate the peculiarities of interventionism and peoples attitude to it. American soldiers sent to Korea were sure that they were fighting for to protect the states interests and contribute to its further rise (Clarke, 2004). Moreover, the Korean war also showed that it was crucial to increase spending on the army as it was not ready to perform some tasks. In other words, it could be considered the first evidence of the great cost of interventionism. Additionally, it also demonstrated that Americans should be ready to engage in various military conflicts in different regions and die for the sake of some unclear purpose.
Therefore, the adherence to this course demanded new demonstrations of power and protection of interests in all strategic regions. In this regard, the Vietnam war became another consequence of the US interventionism. Being afraid of the USSR strong presence in the region, the USA interfered into the Vietnam domestic policy and provided an economic and military support to one of the sides of the military conflict. The government considered it to be a threat from the North and proclaimed their desire to use troops to assist people in the region (Aggression from the north, 1965). However, the Vietnam war became one of the most difficult for the USA. Thousands of soldiers were killed during the conflict, and the state had to leave the area. Being one of the most tragic events, this war also evidences the first signs of the dissatisfaction with the course chosen by the government to attain global dominance. The conflict was extremely unpopular in the USA and preconditioned the rise of civil movements and pacifism aimed at the reconsideration of the states course and ending of this war. Numerous historic documents provide us with the information that proves this fact. For instance, in Vietnam veterans’ letter to authorities, they state that this war had nothing in common with the ideals of liberty, freedom, and democracy (Kerry, 1971). They tortured people and civilians and destroyed the land. That is why they were against it. Moreover, it uncovered the first signs of the dissatisfaction with the interventionism and signaled that there was a certain group of people that wanted the state to be focused on its internal problems and focus its attention on it.
The US involvement in Afghan war also resulted from the adherence to the interventionism. The USA opposed the USSR in its desire to replace the government of the state with the loyal one. The clash of interests of these super states and the exploration of the interventionism resulted in the devastation of the land, giant spending, and numerous deaths. Additionally, the war also was not popular in the American society. The complexity of the relations between parties in Afghanistan preconditioned the long term character of the war and the appearance of numerous problems in the future. Even today the USA has to remain in the region to control the situation. It is obvious that it is a very expensive affair as military bases should be sponsored. There are numerous appeals to stop this operation and withdraw troops. However, because of the peculiarities of the chosen course, the USA is not able to do it without the significant decrease of its influence in the region.
The further events and conflicts evidenced the constant alteration of the attitude to the course used by the state and the rise of the opposition that insisted on the adherence to the isolationism and focus on the domestic policy. Persian Gulf war became another military conflict characterized by the US presence. According to archives, US interests in the region were vital to its national security (Bush, 1990) and had to be protected. Additionally, huge oil deposits contributed to the great strategic importance of the region and attracted the attention of the leading states. That is why, Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was used as a reason to explore interventionism and make the US positions in the region more powerful (Burr & Richelson, 2001). This war was successful for the USA, and it managed to achieve its goals. However, it also cost a lot for the budged, and the opposition of the course admitted this fact.
Therefore, this war triggered the further deterioration of the situation in the region and became the first in a chain of military conflicts that altered the situation there greatly. Additionally, the USA became involved in other complex clashes and events. Iraq War, War on Terror, Libyan and Syrian wars are characterized by the US presence and its leading role. The USA became the main initiator of these conflicts and sent its troops to protect different national interests. However, different from the previous ones, these wars gave rise to vigorous debates related to the reconsideration of the role the USA played in the world and remedies used to attain goals that came from the doctrine accepted by the government. The Libyan and Syrian wars still attract great public attention. There is the perspective that the US intervention in these states preconditioned the rise of the terrorist threat and resulted in the creation of ISIS which managed to occupy a great number of Syrian territories (Anderson, 2016). Being one of the states that proclaim the struggle with terrorism to be their major tasks, the USA is not able to control the situation. For this reason, the position of the opponents of interventionism became very strong. According to the latest investigations, 45% of the citizens of the USA are sure that the state needs changes (Clarke, 2004). It could not remain the global policemen anymore as the great financial crisis and numerous internal problems conditioned the decrease of its economic power. That is why there is the idea that spending on the military sector should be reconsidered.
Nevertheless, one of the arguments suggested by the opponents of interventionism is the convergence that exists between the modern course that implies interventionism and American values. Traditionally, patriotism has been the core of the mentality peculiar to the citizens of the state. People were proud of their state and accepted the necessity to protect its lands and interests. However, the latest events and military conflicts raise eyebrows among individuals who are far from policy. Americans do not understand the necessity of these wars and why they should pay for that. Moreover, democracy was another value appreciated by society, and at the moment this value also suffers. People doubt the fact that the US intervention in other states could help to improve the situation there and restore democracy. Furthermore, the increased spending gives rise to numerous concerns related to the ability of the US economy to recover and bear the difficulties of war. For these reasons, the opposition isolationism vs. interventionism becomes extremely topical nowadays.
As stated above, numerous conflicts in which the USA took part during the second half of the 20th century resulted in the alteration of the attitude to the doctrine and remedies used to attain the outlined goals. These clashes also raised numerous philosophic and moral issues. For instance, pacifism blossomed after the Vietnam war and became a powerful social movement that insisted on the termination of war and usage of other tools to attain various goals. Furthermore, these wars posed a question of true democracy and remedies that could be used to protect or build it. The horrible face of war, numerous devastations and thousands of deaths improved the comprehending of the issue and contributed to the appearance of doubts related to the necessity to involve in the new conflict.
Besides, these hesitations could not but affect society and result in the alteration of peoples mentality and the way society perceives the US interventions to other states. For instance, the WW II was considered the real threat to the state and thousands of volunteers wanted to join the troops and protect the USA. It generated the wave of patriotism and enthusiasm. After the end of the war, Americans were sure that they would be able to make their state the most powerful in the world and preserve peace and democracy (Marty, n.d.). However, the Vietnam war caused other feelings. People were in a maze as they realized the horrible consequences of this conflict and the high price society had to pay for it. Thousands of deaths and great spending did not contribute to any positive result or improvement of the US position.
Additionally, the economic factor became another aspect that conditioned the topicality of the opposition isolationism vs. interventionism. The USA remains one of the most powerful states with the great budget and great opportunities. However, the chain of financial crises, great spending on wars, and financial support given to loyal governments became a crippling burden for the economic sector. People became dissatisfied with the fact that there was no money for different social programs. For instance, the healthcare sector which always suffered from the lack of financing became one of the most disputable questions. People were sure that money devoted to military conflicts in different regions all over the world should be spent to improve the conditions of the health care delivery.
Altogether, the conflicts of the 20th century in which the USA took part became one of the main reasons that preconditioned the increased topicality of the opposition isolationism vs. interventionism. There are numerous appeals to reconsider the existing course and focus on the internal problems that deteriorate the quality of people’s life and destroy the traditional values appreciated by the US society. Additionally, the latest actions performed in terms of interventionism and the vector of the foreign policy are very often considered self-serving, extreme, and even harmful for the regions and states that experienced the US interference. For these reasons, isolationism could be taken as an appropriate alternative to the interference in the domestic policy of other states and attempts to remain the global policeman. The USA should be ready to accept the new course that rests on the preservation of traditional values and restoration of patriotism peculiar to Americans. The period of the Cold war and the bipolar world has already passed, and there is the necessity to act in the new environment in accordance with the new conditions.
References
Aggression from the north. (1965). Web.
Anderson, T (2016). The dirty war on Syria: No popular uprising. The World Financial Review. Web.
Burr, W., & Richelson, T. (2001). Operation Desert Storm: Ten years later. Web.
Bush, G. (1990). National security directive. Web.
Clarke, V. (2004). Students’ global awareness and attitudes to internationalism in a world of cultural convergence. International baccalaureate organization, 3(1), 51-70.
Kerry, J. (1971). Vietnam veterans against the war statement. Web.
Marty, M. (n.d.). Twentieth century: Society in the United States. Web.
Patton, M. (2016). U.S. debt is heading toward $20 trillion: Where it’s been, where it’s going and why. Forbes. Web.
Truman, H. (1950). Statement by the President. Web.