A Policing and political Military

Essay > Words: 2055 > Rating: Excellent > Buy full access at $1

A Policing and political Military

Should the United State’s Military be used as a political and policing force in the global arena? This question of when and when not to use military force has been a major topic of debate for every president since the U.S. was established in 1776.  The facts of the issues are that the United State’s military has no other option than to be a political machine and a policing force in the world.

The U.S. is the supreme force in the entire world.  The cold war is over and peace must be kept.  With great power comes great responsibility and the U.S. must preserve peace and defend democracy.  In an article written by Richard Falk, “The president mentioned that past rivalries among states arose because of their efforts to compete with one another, but insisted that the future will be different because of American military superiority: ‘America has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond challenge, thereby making the destabilizing arms races of other eras pointless, and limiting rivalries to trade and other pursuits of peace.’” (web).  Falk, in this statement is referring to the arms buildup of wars such as World War I.  In order for the U.S to maintain peace and democracy throughout the world, it needs to be anti-isolationist and pro-usage of military power, whether the military be used as a political force or a policing force.

First of all, the United State’s occupation in foreign soil prevents war.  This is a political factor which helps keeps the peace in the two fronts which a major war might occur, such as in Europe and Asia.  In that case, the U.S. deploys troops to bases stationed in Europe and Japan.  Aside from these military instillations the U.S. also deploys aircraft carriers around the world as a political device and deterrent.  A U.S. aircraft carrier off the coast of a foreign country signifies the might of American military power.  Along with this, the U.S. deploys stealth bombers around the world, and this too is used as a political device that represents the strength of American military supremacy.  If it was not for these political forces being used by the military, countries might be tempted to become militarily aggressive towards other countries.  The United States presence in Asia prevents war from breaking out.  For this necessity of American troops around the globe, the U.S. has been labeled global cop.  Nicholas Kristof suggests in his 1995 article in New York Times that the pentagon and almost all countries in Asia desperately want American bases to remain, fearing if they depart that North Korea and China might become militarily adventurous (web).  “The other argument often made for the bases is that they not only protect Japan, but also protect against Japan (Kristof web).  The reason for U.S. presence in Japan to protect against Japan is a very defendable position.  If the U.S. were to pull out, Japan would be compelled to re-arm and therefore become a threat once more, not only to the U.S but to the world.  The initial reason for the United State’s presence in Europe was to protect against the Soviet Union during the cold war.  However, the U.S. had a second and longer term motive for being present there.

In Europe, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was an instrument of “dual containment.”  While keeping the Soviet Union at arm’s length, NATO also locked Germany into a restraining embrace, and for the same purpose’ to prevent either from overturning the existing political order on the European continent.  The Germans came to accept and appreciate the arrangement.  It relieved them if the burden of defending themselves while at the same time dissipating the cloud of suspicion that would otherwise have enveloped them.  Within the Atlantic alliance, therefore, the United States functioned as a buffer among parties with no cause for conflict but with historical reasons for mistrust.  The American presence reassured each NATO member that the others harbored no aggressive intentions (Mandelbaum web).

The U.S. is in the business of keeping Democracy.  Ever since President Roosevelt and his big stick policy, America has been determined to influence the world in the way of democracy.  America believes that dictatorships and communism are wrong and if left unattended and unpunished, they will bring chaos to the world.  Therefore, the U.S. has adopted the responsibility of keeping the world safe for democracy to flourish.  On page seven, the National Security Strategy explains that in the war on terrorism, “we are ultimately fighting for our democratic values and way of life.”  Since the cold war there have been several cases where military intervention was used for the political purpose of preserving democracy.  Grenada was ordered to be invaded in October 1983 (Haass 25). Grenada was a small island in the Caribbean.  There, 600 American medical students were believed to be endangered by the unstable government.  The military action taken on the outside was aimed at rescuing the endangered Americans.  On the inside, however, there was an underlying political motivation.  “The motivation behind the use of force seems more a result of perceived opportunity: to replace a government friendly toward Cuba and the Soviet Union with one more pro-Western and democratic [. . .]” (Haass 25).  The finest example of the U.S. military being used for the political purpose of preserving democracy was in the Gulf War.  On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait (Haass 32).  Through a well-planned out attack on Iraq, the U.S. was able to drive out Iraq and liberate Kuwait.  This was done through extensive bombing by the U.S. Air Force followed by a massive infantry maneuver executed by the U.S. Army.  “The objectives of operation Desert Shield was: Kuwait’s liberation; the restoration of Kuwait’s government; the security and stability of Saudi Arabia and the entire Gulf region; and the protection of U.S citizens” (Haass 32). Operation Desert Shield was political in the sense that it freed Kuwait from Iraq’s dictatorship.  The second objective of the operation was to restore Kuwait’s government.  This was done for the purpose of restoring democracy in the.............


Type: Essay || Words: 2055 Rating || Excellent

Subscribe at $1 to view the full document.

Buy access at $1
CategoriesUncategorized