Human Rights Intervention

Human Rights and Human Intervention

One of the known reasons for the introduction of foreign policy in America was for the spread of democracy where humanitarian purposes and promoting human rights was their main motive. It is consistent with American values and a necessary precondition of the democratic peace, the idea that mature democracies treat not only their own citizens better but their neighbors as well (Haass, 2013). America has always been involved with many countries since the collapse of the Soviet Union and no doubt that America is the best super power country in the world. The United States had provided economic aid to several countries during the nineteen nineties and onwards. The possibility of a war in the future, with the

Looking at all the failures of America in the past two decades, one of the common things part of all the problems they were involved in was the acceleration of the process of spreading democracy everywhere. Their main intention to spread democracy was to promote world peace and prosperity and to disconnect the world from the rule of dictatorships. Not only did the United States mostly fail to create stable democracies outside Europe, but this ambitious project inevitably provoked a harsh backlash from states that saw it as a direct threat to their own interests and stability (Walt, 2015). The Iraq war initiated in 2003 was another case that America shouldn’t have got involved in. Initially, the war was built on the need to remove Saddam Hussein, described by the administration as a dictator who was “building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East (Council of Foreign Relations, 2006). US did not have to go to war with Iraq since everything was based on assumption or little proof. Sadam Hussein and Iraq were not involved with the 9/11 attacks and were the least among those who harbored terrorism. America could have chosen another possible way to interfere with the biological weapons or nuclear program trouble but ended up taking

Rhode states that “without reliable local allies, implementing reforms is virtually impossible”. He puts forth the view that the involvement of American forces was necessary for these countries betterment. Additionally, he states the United States helped greatly in terms of “post war reconstruction efforts”. These countries being third world countries, they needed the aid of United States to set up new armies, governments, a better economy and so on for an overall change in the progress of these countries. However, David Rhode contradicts his statement of the Americans aid having helped with “ninety percent of the U.S. money spent here – roughly $15 billion - covered the cost of the American troop deployment.” The world is left to wonder if the intervention of America was purely a publicity stunt or they genuinely wanted to help the civilians of these war torn nations. Rhode finally ends with “Bosnia is a partial success. It is not the sweeping failure that American isolationists contend”. This statement tries to illustrate that the writer believes America cannot fully be blamed and that the American intervention in war torn nations has been partially beneficial. On the contrary, Barbara Conry highlights the fact that the involvement of American military intervention only “aggravates the situation and can create a number of problems