Since becoming a world power in the early 20th century, the United States has often been referred to as a “world police.” However, our policing actions do not seem to follow a strict set of morals or laws. In fact, they often contradict international laws set in place by the United Nations and even our own constitutional boundaries. This has led to the the US engaging in an alarming amount of destructive war efforts that we are still seeing today. Whether the US is too engaged or not engaged enough in foreign affairs is not particularly a question of consequence; what truly matters is that when we do get involved, are we going about it in a way that is beneficial to the world, and therefore ourselves? The answer is a resounding no. Our efforts are largely misguided and a majority of the time, unsuccessful. So how did this pattern start, why has it kept occurring, and what can be done to end it? By examining our past failures, the conclusion can be drawn that a decrease in Presidential power, an increase in transparency with the American public, and an increase in international accountability could finally break this bad habit.
To understand what exactly America is doing so wrong, we need to turn back the clock, starting at the end of the nineteenth century. The Spanish-American War essentially marked the beginning of the United States’ current foreign policy. In traditional education, it is often taught that the Spanish-American War was brought about by our sympathy for the struggles of Cubans and Filipinos under Spanish rule, prompting us to strike them first in the Battle of Manila Bay in May of 1989. While this may play some role in why we entered the war, our intentions are not so black and white, and the reason may have been much more strategic and self-serving. The American acquisitions following the aftermath of the war importantly included the islands of the Philippines from the Spanish. At this same time, in 1898, America had also annexed the islands of Hawaii. It was obvious that America had taken a serious interest in the Pacific and that had motivated them to defeat the Spanish. In his book on the Spanish American War’s links to American imperialism, Thomas McCormick states that “[These acquisitions] were obtained, instead, largely in an eclectic effort to construct a system … which could facilitate realization of America’s one overriding ambition in the Pacific — the penetration and, ultimately, the domination of the fabled China market” (1963: 155). In essence, things are not always as they appear when it comes to why the United States decides to mobilize. With the Spanish-American War being the first overseas war fought by the United States, this would set a precedent for American foreign policy being one of self interest under the guise of humanitarianism.
Fast forward nearly sixty years, and the world is a very different place. Two World Wars have occured; the United Nations has been established; and the Cold War, with its fear of communism, is in full swing. The next example of mislead foreign policy comes in the form of the Vietnam War. This is perhaps the best example of what can happen when US foreign policy goes awry by ignoring constitutional and international law. President Lyndon B. Johnson was in a unique situation in 1964 while facing reelection. His main political opponent, Barry Goldwater, had claimed that he was “soft on communism,” a potentially fatal political blow, as evidenced by Truman’s political downfall after China fell to communism. “Believing that the nation’s reputation as a staunch defender against communism was on the line, the President expanded the United States’ military involvement” (Roark, Johnson, Cohen, Stage, & Hartmann 2009: 978). Lyndon Johnson also expanded the power of the presidency by ordering strikes on North Vietnam after the controversial Gulf of Tonkin incident without permission from Congress, the only body of government granted the power to declare war by the Constitution . It was only after he authorized this act of war that he successfully gained permission from Congress to escalate the Vietnam War. This is a concrete example of the United States’ foreign policy being influenced by an internal interest, and then that interest being made reality through the use of illegal presidential power. This, however, was not the only law that was broken during this ordeal.
The Vietnam War, was not by any means a necessary war. In fact, “Most U.S. allies did not consider Vietnam crucial to containing communism and were not prepared to share the military burden in more than token ways” (Roark et al 2009: 978). The United Nations, seeking to avoid all wars, especially unnecessary ones, actually has laws set in place to avoid conflicts like the Vietnam War. Chapter IV of the United Nations Charter of 1945 prohibits all war except under two circumstances. The first of these exceptions, listed in Article 42, states that “[The UN Security Council] may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.” The second, as listed in Article 51, states that “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations.” In the case of Vietnam, the United States was seeking to limit the spread of communism, not protect “international peace and security.” Also, the United States made the first military offensive, ruling out the case for self defense. In the words of Richard Falk, a professor emeritus of international law at Princeton University, “If the US Government had abided by international law, the dreadful experience of the Vietnam War would not have occurred” (Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 2005).
And dreadful it was. As of 2008, the United States Department of Defense reports that over 2.2 million people were either killed or wounded during the Vietnam War, with over half of those casualties being civilians. On top of the loss of life, the unsuccessful effort also damaged the United States’ relations and credibility to the rest of the world. According to one source:
The long pursuit of victory in Vietnam complicated the United States’ relations with other nations, as even its staunchest ally, Britain, doubted the wisdom of the war. The spectacle of terrifying American power used against a small Asian country alienated many in the third world and compromised efforts to win the hearts and minds of people in developing nations. (Roark et al 2009: 996)
It is clear to see now, and it was even clear to see then, that the Vietnam War was a massive blunder in American foreign policy. Unfortunately though, this would not be the last time these mistakes were made.
The lessons of the Vietnam War were apparently not taken well by the United States government, as we continue to make these same moves in the 21st century. After the events of September 11th, 2001, the United States has repeatedly inserted itself into conflicts in the Middle East. Whether it be Iraq, Libya, Syria