Intervention: The Government’s Decision or the American People’s?

During Friday’s class discussion regarding Syria, I began to really think about the United States’ reasons for intervening in a failed state. Many times, we (the U.S.) claim that we are intervening in a country due to humanitarian reasons. But, how often is this actually the case? In class, we discussed the imperialization of Africa by several European countries in the 1800s. While we can now all agree that the motives of the Europeans to imperialize Africa was strictly for their own benefit, (specifically to accumulate resources) I am sure that many Europeans at the time believed that they were helping the African people. I can’t help but ask if much has changed since this time? Can we really argue that in today’s world, we are not first and foremost concerned with our nation’s own well being and economic advances- and if that is the case, is that necessarily a bad thing?  This is of course in stark contradiction with the claim that the U.S. constantly makes that we are solely intervening in order to help those who are suffering. It is also important to ask if it is the job of the government to decide whether or not we should intervene in failing states or should the American people be well enough informed about foreign affairs to make these decisions themselves? I would argue, that it is the American government’s responsibility to equip American citizens with the necessary information to make them aware of their intentions for intervening in a “failing” state. However, it is also the job of the American citizens to stay informed with foreign affairs in order to adequately give their opinion on what actions are best for the nation.

            Will brought up a really interesting point in class on Friday during our discussion on Syria. When the U.S. government intervenes in a “failing” state, many times we claim that the main reason for U.S. involvement is for humanitarian efforts; and we do this in order to gain support from the public. While I think humanitarian efforts are often a very good reason for the United States’ involvement, and I agree that it is one that the American population most largely sympathizes with, if that is the reason we must give to the public to justify our involvement, and get the public on board with intervention, then I see this as a huge problem in our society. From the beginning, American citizens should be told the truth as to why the government feels the need to involve itself in failing states (regardless of whether or not the government predicts the decision will spark public approval of the decision). Secondly, if American citizens are informed of the government’s true intentions in intervening, they will be able to decide for themselves if they believe that the United States should intervene or not. 

If the American people were told that we were going to intervene in a failed state for humanitarian purposes, however, the government had alternate intentions, (for example: balancing power, threat of nuclear weapons, etc.) than the American people must be kept informed of why it is in America’s interest to intervene in a country. If the US government started lying to the American people by saying that we are getting involved in another country’s affairs for different reasons than what the American people are told, than this will create an even larger divide between American people and the government and heighten the sense of mistrust between citizens and their elected representatives. Such divides, (between the American government and U.S. citizens) many people would argue, are quite evident in this country. Thus, to eliminate further divides and mistrust between the government and American citizens, the government must be truthful in its reasons for intervening in a failed state. However, with this truthfulness and honesty comes a duty from the American people to keep themselves well informed about foreign affairs and policies. How can we expect the government to be truthful with us if we as citizens choose to be ill informed about what is going on in the world? Thus, it becomes the responsibility of individuals to educate themselves to become informed citizens.

            Lastly, it is incredibly important for American citizens to be truthfully told why the US government wants to intervene in failed states in order to determine for themselves if intervention is the right thing to do. One of the biggest criticisms of the Iraq War was that Bush pushed his “powerful rhetoric” onto the American people and convinced them that war was the right thing to do. However, there was also a lot of “imperfect information” surrounding Iraq and their weapons of mass destruction (or lack thereof) program. I believe that if there had been more sound, concrete information provided to the American people, (and I am not saying that this is the US government’s fault) than maybe there would have been more objection to the war because they would have been able to come to their own conclusions regarding whether war should be waged or not.