Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Ron Paul Respects the Sovereignty of an Upcoming India and the Rest of the World

In the wake of the recent US-India Nuclear deal, two notable conclusions can be drawn. One is that Americans, including the careless foreign policy of the Bush administration, realize the potential of a free and rapid growing India during the next 50 years. The other is that even in this infancy stage, India is rightly cautious in entering any alliances and unyielding positions that would hinder its potential future growth as well as make it a pawn to any country in the global sphere.

Many candidates support the nuclear deal, but there is only one that can be easily identified as the candidate who supports the independent growth of India. In the past few months, Representative Ron Paul has annoyed some and inspired others. It’s no secret that his blunt talk and strong opinions have created some fires in the relatively placid GOP race. His position of staying away from "foreign entanglements" has been ridiculed by those who fail to look outside the current paradigm of American foreign policy that has been misguided since the Korean War. In terms of dealing with other nations, his policy is quite simple- "talk to people and trade with people". He applies the principles of the free market to foreign policy, making one of the most inconsistent and illogical positions for other candidates consistent with his own beliefs.

While some may find his positions immoral, inconceivable, and impractical, Representative Paul has garnered as much positive international attention as national. A quick Google search finds many fan sites such as: (in Portugese) (in Spanish, based out of Venezuela)

Americans often ask themselves “Why are we so hated throughout the world?”, more now then ever. It may take years to explain every detail this country has done to anger others, but for a “2nd tier” candidate who holds less than 5% in the national polls, (name) has quite a strong fan base around the world. This is quite possibly due to his persistent belief of letting other countries take care of their own matters. No one appointed America as the caretaker for the world, and the notion of America as the world’s policeman has always been unpopular both at home and abroad.

For the sake of India’s sovereignty, America should take the back seat and allow India to learn from her own mistakes. No country wants to be told what to do. Of course, it’s required and necessary to offer guidance/lessons learned, but there is no need for the US to meddle in another country’s affairs. Instead, it’s important for us to get our own house in order before we give others the blueprints.

Anay Shah
Blog Editor


Kelef said...

Ron Paul's antiquated views on foreign policy do not recognize how we leave in globally connected world now. The US has an obligation to lead and to work with other democratic allies such as India, for security and economic prosperity. It is a distortion to think that Paul's policies would lead to stronger US India relations. On the contrary, they would lead to isolationism and an America that our democratic allies could no longer rely upon.

Larry Nieves said...

Thanks for the link. To kelef: Who gave the US the "obligation" to lead? Nobody. Much of the anti-americanism in the world stems from that attitude. Just leave us alone, don't interefere with our internal affairs and you will find yourselves welcome with open arms all over the world.

Mayank said...

Kelef - I don't necessary agree with you. Ron Paul's views are not antiquated, but revolutionary. He is not calling for isolationism at all... Free markets work better on a global scale than by country to country. Why? There are more resources and a basket to choose from as opposed to only a select few. I've been a life long liberal, but I completely agree with Paul on what everyone in the world thinks of us. I like Barack as well, we need some one who isn't going conform to our way of doing things since WWII.