Sample Essay on U.S Military Intervention in other Countries

United States military troops have in the past intervened in foreign countries. The United States has one of the most equipped and well-trained armies in the world and its presence in some of the regions such as Iraq and Lebanon can be deemed as the United States trying to assert its power in these regions. However, the United States has no right to directly intervene in other countries. International law forbids countries to intervene in the issues of other countries unless special circumstances prevail. United States Army can intervene in other countries if the legitimate government of the said country asks the U.S to intervene. Moreover, the U.S military can intervene pursuant to an order by the United Nations. Thirdly military force can be applied in self-defense. The three special circumstances agreed upon by United Nations member countries ensure that powerful nations do not intervene in other countries’ affairs for selfish benefits. United States military can only intervene under the right conditions because each nation is sovereign and has the right to conduct its affairs the way it deems appropriate within the confines of the law.

The United States can send its army to another country if the security of the United States is threatened by the war in that given country. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter provides for force to be used in self-defense[1]. The United States has the right to protect itself if it feels that the war in a foreign country will also affect its citizens. The 9/11 attacks led to the loss of lives in America and it was an attack by terrorists from other regions. United States believed that deploying military men in regions where the suspected members of AL Qaeda reside would help protect its citizens against further attacks in the future. The army penetrated regions such as Iraq and Afghanistan to weed out terrorists as well as help bring stability to the region[2]. While military intervention in these regions has showcased that the United States has the weapons and manpower to protect itself from attacks, it has also led to the death of thousands of civilians, even innocent women and children in these regions. The United States has the obligation to protect its borders and citizens but it does so at the expense of other people[3]. Military intervention in these regions has not only impacted the political and economic structures but also the social dynamics of the country.

In addition, the United States can intervene in other nations alongside other nations as a result of an order issued by the United Nations Security Council or the general assembly. United Nations can call for its member countries to intervene in a region where there is war with the purpose of restoring peace[4]. United Nations peacekeeping missions have taken place in regions such as Asia, the Americas, and Africa among others. The role of the peacekeeping troops sent to these regions is to help the government of the given region which might have been torn apart by war to achieve peace so that the nation can begin to rebuild itself[5].

Moreover, there can be the use of force by the United States in other countries if the legitimate government of that country asks for assistance to repress revolutions[6]. Sometimes governments might feel that they do not have the manpower and the equipment to repress an uprising in their territories and so they can seek help from those countries that are already established such as the United States. U.S army’s role in such cases is to work alongside the given country’s army to weed out individuals who are problematic as well as ensure that innocent civilians are not caught up in the crossfire.

However, U.S military intervention in other countries has in some cases been deemed as unnecessary and has led to more problems than solutions. United States army presence in Iraq and Afghanistan has not led to stability; on the contrary, these regions are yet to recover from the war. The political, social, and economic stability of the regions has failed. The use of force does not repress revolutions but rather leads to chaos and death[7]. There is a heavy military presence in Somalia and this has not helped end the terrorist attacks witnessed in the region and its neighboring countries[8]. The use of force seems to encourage rebels and terrorists to continue with their operations.

United States Army can be deployed in other countries if the given countries ask for its help in repressing revolutions and maintaining peace. Moreover, the US can intervene if the UN gives an order to intervene in war-torn regions so as to help stabilize the regions. In addition, the States have the right to intervene if they feel that the activities of some of the members in the given countries jeopardize its security. However, caution should be exercised so that the United States does not take advantage of its military superiority to oppress other countries. The guidelines provided by the United Nations have helped to limit the use of force in foreign countries

Endnotes

Glennon, Michael J. “The fog of law: Self-defense, inherence, and incoherence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.” Harv. JL & Pub. Pol’y 25 (2001): 539.

Gordon, Ruth E. “Humanitarian Intervention by the United Nations: Iraq, Somalia, and Haiti.” Tex. Int’l LJ 31 (1996): 43.

Pickering, Jeffrey, and Emizet F. Kisangani. “Political, economic, and social consequences of foreign military intervention.” Political Research Quarterly 59, no. 3 (2006): 363-376.

Tillema, Herbert K., and John R. Van Wingen. “Law and power in military intervention: major states after World War II.” International Studies Quarterly 26, no. 2 (1982): 220-250.

Wippman, David. “Military intervention, regional organizations, and host-state consent.” Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 7 (1996): 209.

Wright, Quincy. “The legality of intervention under the United Nations Charter.” In Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its annual meeting, vol. 51, pp. 79-90. Cambridge University Press, 1957.

[1] Wright, Quincy. “The legality of intervention under the United Nations Charter.” In Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its annual meeting, vol. 51, pp. 79-90. Cambridge University Press, 1957.

[2] Gordon, Ruth E. “Humanitarian Intervention by the United Nations: Iraq, Somalia, and Haiti.” Tex. Int’l LJ 31 (1996): 43.

[3] Glennon, Michael J. “The fog of law: Self-defense, inherence, and incoherence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.” Harv. JL & Pub. Pol’y 25 (2001): 539.

[4] Gordon, Ruth E. “Humanitarian Intervention by the United Nations: Iraq, Somalia, and Haiti.” Tex. Int’l LJ 31 (1996): 43.

[5] Tillema, Herbert K., and John R. Van Wingen. “Law and power in military intervention: major states after World War II.” International Studies Quarterly 26, no. 2 (1982): 220-250.

[6] Wippman, David. “Military intervention, regional organizations, and host-state consent.” Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 7 (1996): 209.

[7] Pickering, Jeffrey, and Emizet F. Kisangani. “Political, economic, and social consequences of foreign military intervention.” Political Research Quarterly 59, no. 3 (2006): 363-376.

[8] Gordon, Ruth E. “Humanitarian Intervention by the United Nations: Iraq, Somalia, and Haiti.” Tex. Int’l LJ 31 (1996): 43.