Interfering with the Internal Politics of another Country

No country should interfere with the internal politics of another country. Describe a specific situation in which a country might justifiably interfere with the internal politics of another country. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a country should interfere with another country's internal politics. In the decade since 9-11, the United States has been commonly criticized for its interventionist policies. That is, the government has extensively interfered with the internal politics of other nations in the name of safeguarding its national security and dominance in the world. While the US received extensive global support immediately following 9-11, the seemingly never-ending war in Iraq, the accompanying thousands of civilian and military deaths, and the debunking of the WMD pretext caused those in the international and national arena to question US interventionism. In order for countries to mitigate their chances for being involved in dangerous global disputes, countries should avoid interfering with the internal politics of othe countries. Indeed, the quest of global dominance often necessitates countries, such as the US, to get involved in the domestic matters in other countries. In order to maintain its hegemony in the world, the US government often interferes in the affairs of other nations. For example, it may attempt to manipulate another economy through sanctions in order to protect the dollar and secure its economic status. It may influence voting results by funding groups advocating for democracy. It may also fund rulers as a way to ensure their politics are in line with US interests. Most of these influences are accomplished through diplomatic means; other times, the US uses its military prowess to achieve goals. While interfering with other nations may increase one's power, Anti-American groups and activities have multiplied due to US hegemony. While US claims to be protecting US citizens and its global status, its interventionist policies have ironically made more Americans unsafe in the homeland and abroad. There are, however, arguably good reasons for countries to intervene in another country's internal politics. For example, the US entered Bosnia in the mid-90s on a humanitarian mission---as a way to prevent Kosovans from being killed in mass numbers. Granted, the US always has extra motives when being involved in a humanitarian mission. After all, the government chose not to rescue Rwandans in what was probably the worst case of genocide in the 20th century; simply put, the US did not have anything else to gain by involving its military in the region. Notwithstanding ulterior motives, humanitarian interventions do save many lives and that fact, in itself, may justify a nation's interference in another's domestic politics. The US, indeed, has probably boost its own status in the global arena by being heavily involved in other countries' affairs. It is still holding on to its global dominance, avoiding further major terrorist activities on the homeland, and having foreign leaders supporting its goals. However, this grand-scale intervention has come at a price. That is, the Anti-American movement has been growing at a rapid pace and people around the world have come to resent the fact that their national affairs are directly affected by US will. Indeed, in order to mitigate chances of dangerous global disputes, nations should avoid meddling with the internal affairs of other nations.