U.S. has always projected a very selfish attitude about how they deal with political situations
A lot of people jumped on you for your statement. I actually agree that the U.S. has often failed to achieve its goals due to defining its "missions" in too much of a short term context. But what I found most interesting was this "selfish" part of it.
Isn't foreign policy supposed to be selfish? Aren't countries expected to act in their own self interest?
Most are. But with the U.S., a different standard is often applied. The implied expectation is that part of U.S. foreign policy is supposed to be designed to help the world at large, to make it a better and safer and more prosperous place. What other nation is expected to tax its citizens to send food to corrupt countries? When there are refugees and oppressed minorities, whether they be Kurds in Northern Iraq or ethnic Albanians in Kosovo or Kuwaitis under Saddam's boot, why do their leaders ask, "where is America? Why haven't they helped us?" We don't always succeed in helping them, we don't always try (for which we are also criticized), but stop to think....why are they asking us instead of somebody else?
I think the reason is, that no one else, no other country, has successfully articulated the ideal of personal liberty and freedom the way the U.S. has. Yes, we are the wealthiest country in history, and that is part of the reason so much is expected of us. But what many fail to understand is that our wealth and our personal liberty and freedom are linked; the wealth resulted in large part from the freedoms. Many (especially oppressive foreign governments) hate us not only because we are wealthy, but because that wealth came from a system diametrically opposed to their own. |
