The United States shouldn't be the only country responsible for fighting global threats

We all knew someone in college who had a sort of irritatingly complicated relationship with their parents. They’d complain about the meddling their mothers were doing in their adult lives, about the unsolicited advice their fathers were giving them on career paths and majors. And then they’d unblinkingly allow their parents to pay their tuition, accept “care packages” from what they still saw as “home,” and trot out the parental credit card for spring break trips and other purchases.

This happens on an international level, too – only with countries, not just people. And it’s the U.S. that’s taking much of the brunt of it.

The United States engenders a substantial amount of resentment around the world, and some of it is deserved. The predatory behavior of U.S. corporations operating overseas makes people angry. There’s a sense in many countries that the Hollywood entertainment industry has become a sort of cultural imperialist, spreading a set of American values that are upsetting long-held traditions in other nations. That would be a more sympathetic view if those same countries weren’t eagerly consuming U.S. movies, fashions and iPhones. And, of course, there’s understandable aggravation over U.S. foreign policy decisions – wars, embargoes, trade restrictions or lack thereof – that had a collateral effect on other regions of the world.

Points taken. But that also means that the rest of the world can no longer expect the United States to fix every problem in every sector of the earth, especially since the U.S. no longer has the fiscal capacity to do so.

That means, as Secretary of State John Kerry explains more diplomatically in a piece in , that it’s time for other nations to step up and do more to deal with the Ebola crisis. According to information provided by the State Department, the U.S. has invested more than $113 million in an effort to deal with the problem; the entire European Union ranks a far second, having put in $55.5 million. Money and people are needed to care for patients, to pay for laboratories and staff and to equip local hospitals. People – and some brave people, at that – are needed to act as first responders. And governments need to manage air traffic and border safety in a way that keeps the virus from spreading without effectively quarantining entire nations.

The Islamic State group, too, is not just America’s problem, and it should not be the United States' sole responsibility to fix. This is a regional problem first and foremost, and the neighboring countries need to get actively involved to keep the terror group from gaining more territory and power. (We’re talking about you, Turkey.) The reluctance of European nations to get too deeply involved is understandable, as their citizens don’t want to get mired in a costly, painful, perhaps unwinnable Middle East war. But neither does this country, and the terror group is just as much of a threat to Europe as it is to the United States. The Islamic State group now controls about a third of Kobani, right on the Turkish-Syria border. And yet Turkey – which one would think would be concerned about its own security – is reluctant to do anything.

Even on the Russia-Ukraine conflict – a matter far more pressing for Europe than for the United States, which does not face such a direct threat from Putin – Europe lagged behind, grudgingly agreeing to participate in sanctions after pressure from the U.S.

You can’t have it both ways: You can’t complain about the hegemony and arrogance of a superpower, insisting it back off, and then expect that same nation to solve all of your regional problems. Step up, people. 

Posted in: Forex, sujet en anglais