If the United States does something to intervene in world affairs it is both wrong and right.
It will be labeled the world’s overbearing policeman and also the greatest superpower on earth.
It’s impossible for the U.S. to be all things to all people, and this has caused many Americans to wonder why other countries, especially developed nations like many of our allies, cannot pick up some of the slack.
These beliefs played well with President Trump’s “America First” outlook, but many decried his pro-U.S. rhetoric as too nationalistic.
While I do not support many of the protectionist policies Trump would like to enact, I do think he is right for calling attention to the gap between the U.S.‘s global efforts and the efforts of its allies.
One of the prime examples of this is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
After Trump took office, he caused an uproar by claiming NATO was unfair to Americans because they paid more than their fair share in exchange for allied support.
However, judging by indirect funding of NATO, the U.S. does spend the most by funding 22 percent of NATO’s budget. Even President Obama said European allies often did not contribute their fair share to these alliances.
To put this into perspective, NATO member nations are asked to allocate two-percent of their GDP to fund the alliance. The U.S. annually gives money equal to 3.61 percent of its GDP to NATO, while countries like France, Germany and Italy all fail to reach the two-percent goal.
This, coupled with the fact that the U.S. has the highest GDP in the world, means that many European nations are disproportionately benefiting from U.S. contributions.
It’s easy to look at European nations and criticize U.S. social programs.
This is a contentious subject, but one of the reasons is the U.S. provides the funding for research that benefits the whole world, and it’s not just military.
Let’s take a look at the pharmaceutical industry. It is constantly slammed, sometimes rightly, about how the prices of drugs in the U.S. are too high when compared to nations like Canada.
However, this fails to account for the fact that the U.S. subsidized drug development and research that is then used by the rest of the world.
When American consumers buy pharmaceuticals, their purchases subsidize the research for the international community.
Overall in 2013, the U.S. paid for 46 percent of biopharmaceutical research.
I think it is easy for all of us to look across the Atlantic and see that Europeans have some social programs that the U.S. does not.
However, this is only because the U.S. pays for things that allow these countries to forgo these parts of their budget.
American allies should be required to contribute more to our alliances, and the U.S. should stop subsidizing the military and pharmaceuticals for the rest of the world.
Maybe then we can support domestic social programs instead.
npatwari@umail.iu.edu
