JESSIE & MELISSA & KIA WOON- { BABABA :D }

Saturday, July 12, 2008

6:30 PM

Do you think it is ever right for one country to become involved in the internal affairs of another?

In my opinion, there is no definite “Yes” or “No” to this question, especially as it mentions “ever right”. I think there is no “ever right”, but instead, in some cases it will be right, while in some other instances, it is not right. Generally, it will depend on the country in question.

It will be right for one country to become involved in the internal affairs of another when the country proves to be inadequate in solving their own problem, such as the example of Myanmar in the recent earthquake. After the earthquake, international aid was refused and even after it was allowed to enter the country, there were strict restrictions on the medical personnel that could enter the country, while foodstuff and medical supplies were slow in reaching the population. If international aid was accepted as soon as the disaster struck, the damage might not be so severe. Even though Myanmar initially maintained that they could deal with the problem on their own, it could be seen that the extent of damage was too much for Myanmar to repair on their own. This was due to the military dictatorship of Myanmar, which made them suspicious of aid from other countries. If another country, or organization such as ASEAN had been involved in 'Operation Myanmar Freedom', as mentioned in the article, this second round of disaster following the lack of repair efforts after the earthquake might have been prevented.

However, this is not always the case. As can be seen form the example of Iraq, another country becoming involved in their internal affairs was “right”, as it rescued the Iraqis from cruel military dictatorship, but in effect it caused much excessive deaths of Iraqis, the very people US troops were meant to save, not mentioning the deaths of troops while on their “Operation Iraqi Freedom” mission. To evaluate the situation, the objective of invading Iraq, which is to give them freedom from the military dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, was “right”, but factor in the extra costs that were incurred, it is not right of another country to become involved in one’s internal affairs.

Also, since it is the “internal affairs” of a country, one would naturally assume that the country is the most capable of rectifying the problem, as they would know the situation better. They would also most probably not have ulterior motives, because logically, they would want the best for their own country. The method used by other countries in “helping” them might then make the situation worse. In this case, it will never be right of another country to become involved in the internal affairs of another.

In conclusion, there is no absolute “ever right” or “never right” to this question. Many other factors would have to be considered, such as the ability of the country to take care of their own internal affairs.

In response to Jessie’s post:

I agree with her stand that “it is right for one country to become involved in the internal affairs of another, provided that there are no ulterior motives involved and just purely for the sake of the well-being of the country and her citizens”. After all, a country constitutes of her people. As long as it is in the well-being of their citizens, there is no reason why another country should not become involved. However, in real life situations it might not always be that simple, it is difficult, when another country is getting involved, that the well-being of the people will not be compromised.

kiawoon