It is sometimes argued that countries that are economically and militarily strong have a moral obligation to aid countries that are economically and militarily less strong, even when not asked for assistance. Others argue that this is extreme arrogance and that uninvited assistance violates the integrity of the country that receives but did not
invite the assistance.
Which do you find more compelling, the belief that economically and militarily strong countries have a moral obligation to aid less strong countries or the response to it? Explain your position, using relevant reasons and/or examples drawn from your own experience, observations or reading.
-------------------
I strongly feel that economically and militarily strong countries should not intervene unless asked for. Every country in this
world is different and unique because of several factors like - culture, politics, demography, geography, histroy etc. Becasue of different background and several factors stated above the constitution of each country is different, forms of government is different, social, economic and political aspirations of people are different, problems of the country and its residents are different and in most of the cases the solution to those problems is also different.
Hence, political or economic strength does not give a country any right to intervene in the internal affairs of the other weak nations. As discussed above complete understanding of the situation, backgroud is required which before even giving a suggestion or a solution to the problem.
In recent past, we have seen militarily strong countries in the guise of aid, actually tries to exploit the natural resources like oil and gas of the weaker countries. Sometimes, these militariliy strong countries under the pressure of business conglomorates forces certain product or technology to the weaker country.
Based on above arguments, we can conclude that each country no matter how weak it is militarily has the right to take its own decisions, choose what is right and wrong for its citizens. Aid should be given only when asked for and only to the extent it is asked for.
However there are few cases which can be considered as exception to this. If any weaker country is doing something, which is considered as wrong by the international fraternity such as promoting terrorism, bonded labor etc, then some uncalled intervention will not be considered wrong. There can be a situation when democratic government has been removed by some autocratic ruler in any country, in such a case though ruling government might not ask for aid from other nations, but the citizens of that nation may expresses the need for international aid and intervention. In such case also uncalled aid and intervention will not be considred wrong.
To conclude, politically or militariliy strong countries should extend their aid and support whenever asked for and to the extent asked for. However in some cases even when no support is asked for by the weaker country, but in order to addres the bigger issues, in the benefit of international fraternity and citizens of the weaker nation, un asked aid and support might be required.
invite the assistance.
Which do you find more compelling, the belief that economically and militarily strong countries have a moral obligation to aid less strong countries or the response to it? Explain your position, using relevant reasons and/or examples drawn from your own experience, observations or reading.
-------------------
I strongly feel that economically and militarily strong countries should not intervene unless asked for. Every country in this
world is different and unique because of several factors like - culture, politics, demography, geography, histroy etc. Becasue of different background and several factors stated above the constitution of each country is different, forms of government is different, social, economic and political aspirations of people are different, problems of the country and its residents are different and in most of the cases the solution to those problems is also different.
Hence, political or economic strength does not give a country any right to intervene in the internal affairs of the other weak nations. As discussed above complete understanding of the situation, backgroud is required which before even giving a suggestion or a solution to the problem.
In recent past, we have seen militarily strong countries in the guise of aid, actually tries to exploit the natural resources like oil and gas of the weaker countries. Sometimes, these militariliy strong countries under the pressure of business conglomorates forces certain product or technology to the weaker country.
Based on above arguments, we can conclude that each country no matter how weak it is militarily has the right to take its own decisions, choose what is right and wrong for its citizens. Aid should be given only when asked for and only to the extent it is asked for.
However there are few cases which can be considered as exception to this. If any weaker country is doing something, which is considered as wrong by the international fraternity such as promoting terrorism, bonded labor etc, then some uncalled intervention will not be considered wrong. There can be a situation when democratic government has been removed by some autocratic ruler in any country, in such a case though ruling government might not ask for aid from other nations, but the citizens of that nation may expresses the need for international aid and intervention. In such case also uncalled aid and intervention will not be considred wrong.
To conclude, politically or militariliy strong countries should extend their aid and support whenever asked for and to the extent asked for. However in some cases even when no support is asked for by the weaker country, but in order to addres the bigger issues, in the benefit of international fraternity and citizens of the weaker nation, un asked aid and support might be required.
