In terms of foreign policy, any country is not immune to violation of its borders due to a number of reasons. First of all, the modern world is highly interconnected because of the process of globalization. The United States also subject to this process, as well as other countries. The world’s economies have enterprises outside their states, which makes their influence on the domestic situation more acute. Therefore, this poses different threats to the national security of the state including the development of the side business, illegal migration, and cyber threats. Securing the borders and enhancing security policies seem to be accurate measures to prevent such dangers. However, as was stated above, globalization makes countries interconnected and interdependent, resulting in the isolationist policy being almost impossible.
Preemptive self-defense tactics are, indeed, an important component of the U.S. security. There is one particular reason for this implying that no country wants any conflicts threatening its integrity, which makes it much easier to eliminate them at the place of origin. When discussing self-defense in the context of foreign policy, people often think about war and violence. Indeed, the notion of preemptive self-defense comes from a claim to use high levels of violence to tackle an incipient development that is not directly threatening (Reisman, 2018). However, self-defense can also imply fairly peaceful actions, for instance, additional control at the borders and a thorough search of those entering the country allows the U.S. to prevent different crimes.
The above-mentioned facts suggest that an isolationist policy suits the United States much more than a liberal one because it protects its borders from various threats. On the other hand, such a careful border protection can adversely affect the country’s economic development and the export of its goods and services. Due to this, it is important to understand in what area isolationism as a policy will be applied. From an economic point of view, for such global powers as the United States, globalization opens the borders and allows to distribute products around the world. If isolationism is applied in this area, the United States will no longer be open to trade, which will inevitably lead to a decrease in its influence. On the other hand, there is an opinion that globalization gave rise to such a phenomenon as international terrorism. In this situation it is necessary for each country to protect its borders and be cautious toward those who enter the state.
Until the Second World War, the United States remained a fairly isolated country, not participating in events on the global arena. The Second World War drew the lesson that the United States should take an active role on the global arena (Nye, 2019). In these new political realities, the United States had to come out of its isolation and begin to take an active part in world processes. The U.S. participation in the world order allowed for the country to reach such progress. This can be considered a reason why the policy of isolationism cannot be applied to all spheres of life in the United States. As it was mentioned earlier, it will inevitably affect the economic situation, as well as reduce the country’s global influence. At the same time, the external threats that exist for each state should not be underestimated. These threats can indeed be addressed by some kind of isolation and careful border protection. However, there might be various alternatives to ensure national security. It is important to remember that The United States is an active participant in different international organizations, which ensure the global peace and stability.
Economic freedom, will ensure prosperity and stability in the United States, however, might make the borders more vulnerable. If national borders are vulnerable to threats, various acts and treaties signed by the United States with other countries may come into force. This, in turn, could bring the same results and effects as the policy of isolationism. Keeping all that in mind, it is safe to say, that the economic freedom will benefit the U.S policy the most.
Reisman, W. M. (2018). Will a policy of preemptive self-defense make us all safer? Yale Law School, Public Law Research Paper, 638, 1-24. Web.
Nye Jr, J. S. (2019). The rise and fall of American hegemony from Wilson to Trump. International Affairs, 95(1), 63-80. Web.