International Security and the Liberal World Order--Fall '23

The article I was mostly drawn to was NY Times, “Is the US done being the World’s Cop”. The article examines the history of US intervention and how it has led us here, to withdrawal troops in Afghanistan.

Bidens quote: ““We did not go to Afghanistan to nation-build,” he said this month. “And it’s the right and the responsibility of Afghan people alone to decide their future and how they want to run their country.” Has me thinking how inconsiderate we as a whole have become. Although, US troops initial intervention was not needed for long term placement (20 years long) … Afghanistan citizens are left dependency for US aid regarding the Iraq and Afghtanistan tension. This is just merely an example of how US intervention has impacted various communities.

Even if, Bidens intentions is to regain American priorities and focusing on American first, US hegemonic gained power has acquired an international responsibility to aid or to provide solutions. Solutions should be done carefully to not disrupt the balance in already dependent governments. The US should continuously partake in intervened governments but not take control as once did. It should serve as advising party and slowly ease its way out rather than withdrawing its resources.

For this week’s post I was drawn to the New York Times article, “Is the United States Done Being the World Cop?” I think this article is extremely relative with discussing the recent withdrawal from Afghanistan and the current conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine/Russia.

For one side, I’ll argue that the United States has become to intertwined and dependent on the rest of the world and should begins to practice isolationism. This does include not getting involved in armed conflicts in which we have no direct reason to be in. The most common question I hear in regard to this topic is, “is it worth American lives?” This I believe is the best argument for the United States not sending ground troops to defend Ukraine. After getting out of 20 years of fighting, the American people do not want more lives lost for something they may or may not agree with. The world tends to look toward the United States to solve their problems and at what point do we say no. But, there is more to it than the surface level of war behind being the world police.

Over the past century, the United States has been the world’s hegemonic power and I think that it is in the best interest of both the government and the people of the country for it to stay that way. Yes, we provide a lot of aid to countries and assist when called upon, but most of the time it is for our economic prowess. The world looks to us to solve their problems, but in return we ask for trade advantages and other economic benefits. The main reason that the United States is in the powerful position that it is, is because the dollar is the world’s reserve currency. This stemmed from Bretton Woods, but more recently the petrodollar. Saudi Arabia and the rest of the OPEC countries agreed to price oil in dollars, if the United States provides military support to those countries. This is the most perfect example of why the United States plays the world police and if the country wants to keep the economic advantage and quality of life it has, they must realize the give and take that comes with it.

In my personal opinion, we are the greatest country in the world and with that comes responsibility. If we do not provide the security to those who need it, they will turn to China. It is not ideal at times, but our daily life would look completely different if China provided security and had the economic advantages that we have.

The Middle East has long been grappling with environmental challenges such as water scarcity, desertification, and extreme temperatures. The Arab speaking countries in the Middle East are among the world’s most exposed states to the accelerating impacts of human-caused climate change. However the consequences of the climate change is felt unevenly across the region. Resource-poor countries that lack adaptive capacities like infrastructure, technology, and human and physical capital is suffering more acutely, especially as global warming contributes to the degradation of rural livelihoods and food security. The effects of global warming will magnify preexisting inequities and decades of unsustainable government policies, particularly those related to water and land management. For example, there had been massive dislocation of people in Lebanon due to drought.

I really liked when the writer of this article said that “In fact, there may be a day, very soon, where the United States will need to return to active Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy — not based on land for peace, but sun and fresh water for peace.” I saw a documentary few years back where it said that the “earth is going nowhere in time it will regenerate , it will be peaceful. There may not be people but the Earth will regenerate because it has all the time in the world but we human beings don’t.” That is true, with so limited time in the earth we have been fighting each other over land, resources and power instead of living harmoniously. Whatever is currently happening in world Isreal vs Palestine, Russia vs Ukraine, China bullying its neighbours is only causing more harm. In my opinion an extreme climate crisis is required to awaken the leaders that they should be working with each other rather than against each other. The pandemic has showed us that we human beings are so inferior that we failed to fight against an invisible virus, during the pandemic, all the weapons that were made to kill people were useless against that one virus.

The Strait of Hormuz is the world’s most important oil chokepoint because of the large volumes of oil that flow through the strait. In 2018, its daily oil flow averaged 21 million barrels per day. The inability of oil to transit a major chokepoint, even temporarily, can lead to substantial supply delays and higher shipping costs, resulting in higher world energy prices. I still remember about the blockage at the Suez Canal during the pandemic and how it hindered the world trade in few days. Like, the Strait of Hormuz, Suez Canal is one of the busiest trade routes in the world and the blockage of the Canal roughly cost 12 per cent of global trade and was holding up trade valued at over $9 billion per day.

Strait of Hormuz being only possible way for the ships to move back and forth from the Persian Golf on the West and Oman in the East. Persian Golf is particularly important as 8 countries share the southern coast. Recent attacks on the narrow waterway has fuelled tensions between Iran and USA. Relations between Washington and Tehran have deteriorated since Trump withdrew last year from a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers, and reimposed and extended sanctions to throttle Iran’s vital oil trade. I really hope the rising tensions between Iran and USA do not lead to bloodshed. If Irans halts the passageway it will cripple global trade.

In my opinion, the rouge nuclear state of North Korea is quite the enigmatic character in the international community. Something I find extremely impressive is that the Kim family was successful in convincing North Koreans of their family’s divine status, revering Kim Jon Un as a god figure. This is a phenomenon that I do not see present in other countries and hasn’t been present in governing bodies since the early to mid twentieth century. Additionally, North Korea (I assume) is an absolutely terrible place to live where any day can be your last due to poverty, famine, sickness, or even saying or doing the wrong thing to the wrong person. To make matters worse, they have developed nuclear weapons and continuously threaten to use them against their adversaries. So how do we convince them to denuclearize when they are so adamant in keeping their WMDs? The problem here, is that Kim Jon Un uses those weapons as a life insurance policy not only for his country and regime, but for himself personally. I’ve explained in previous blog posts that authoritarian dictators use nuclear weapons as a deterrent from invasions and forcible regime changes. Obtaining nuclear weapons guarantees their safety. Furthermore, Kim Jon Un’s threats of nuclear war reward him with eases of sanctions or acquiescence in certain diplomatic or political desires.

In Allison’s article about the Hanoi summit, they mention that Donald Trump tried to convince Kim Jon Un to denuclearize in exchange for becoming an economic powerhouse like Singapore did when they went from authoritarian and corrupt to becoming a bastion for economic success. Although this exchange is enticing and definitely would benefit the people of North Korea, it is extremely unlikely that this would ever occur. The reason being is that Kim Jon Un has already made a lot of enemies and denuclearization would be a literal death sentence to him personally along with his entire family, allies, and regime. At this point Kim Jon Un is more focused on his own survival than that of his fellow countrymen. I don’t see the implementation of a peaceful solution to this issue anywhere in the near future. Maybe the only way to rid the world of this threat is if the North Korea people decide for themselves that enough is enough.