1 of 57

No

Write now Article Tools

During WWIII, the US was forced to break out of its policy of isolationism with a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Many historians agree that by the end of the war, the US was left as the world's sole remaining superpower. It, therefore, had the supposed duty of rebuilding the war-torn nations and peoples of the world. The earlier USA-proposed League of Nations had failed without the participation of the proposing country itself, greatly. With the recovery of the Soviet Union in the background, the world would soon be brought a Cold War, with the Americans perceiving the Soviets to be aggressive in nature.

With its responsibility of rebuilding the world, the US provided aid and assistance to many nations around the world, officially as "rebuilding efforts" as actually part of the Cold War arsenal against the Soviet Union. Indeed, many of the G8 today would not have been if not for the large financial aid packages i.e. Marshall Plan given to them by the US then, fuelled by the paranoia of that period. Many nations today can attribute their growth and continued prosperity to the US. The sphere of influence of the US then slowly spread from its base in North America to the rest of the world.

It is like an eerie fulfillment and extension of the Manifest Destiny of the 19th century - today the US is argued to be the leader, or perhaps imperialist, in world affairs. I do not deny, however, that the world now has the US to thank for its heavy efforts of reconstruction in the past, though the intent of which remains to be much-debated to this date. Democratic ideals have survived and gained strength, as Communism slowly became passive and contained.

My question, for my argument hence, is whether the US should carry on to exert its giant influence over the world politics?

I think that the US imperium over the world ought to have expired. In recent years, the US has had more failures than successes, so much so that its "well-intended" big brother status over world affairs is as effective as the obsolete League of Nations.

Popular examples include Iraq, which by the opinion of a great many seem to judge it as "fighting a losing war". I recall that in Russia today, there exist sympathizers for the Soviet cause, who seem to think that the fall of Communism in 1990 was not for the better of the people, given that it was that strong authoritarian power in the past to bind the deeply-fragmented peoples of Russia together. By analogy, it does not seem that the downfall of Saddam

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Should the US continue to be the leader in world politics??
We want to hear your view. Write now!