Question

Truman argued that the U.S. must be willing to project its financial and military power into different parts of the world to contain the spread of communism. Was Truman justified in making this argument? How does Truman’s argument compare to arguments today about projecting US power to contain or defeat terrorism? In thinking through this issue, consider the following: In the decades after Truman’s Address, the U.S. committed financial and military resources to many countries on different continents, including Greece, Turkey, Korea, Vietnam, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and Chile.

Answer 1

Truman was not justified with respect to expanding the US military power in different countries in the name of containing or preventing communism, because while doing so, USA curtailed the civil rights and human rights of the individuals of that nations, overthrew the governments who went to have sympathy with the communism and curbed the fundamental will and freedom of the people in most of the countries who had elected the government. For example, USA entered into Guatemala where the government had sympathy with the communism. It also happened with the case of Vietnam and USA lost many lives of its own people.  While Korea got into two parts and one country (North Korea) is still isolated from others in present time. While Greece faced government against its own people. Here, people wanted communism and government was supported by USA. So, it created more losses, turbulence and problems than the gains.  Theses countries who faced influence of communism, were already suffering from their domestic problems and communism showed a way to them to resolve it. But, Truman did not understand it and his proposals are affecting some nations even today.

Though, USA could use its financial assistance ( not power) to help nations work on improving market, regulatory framework, infrastructure  and international trade so that these nations   could build a positive perception about free markets or mixed market economies and could not follow communism. But, it also had to be done in a limited extent.  

When  comparing communism with the terrorism, then both are completely different from each other. Communism is an alternative approach to capitalism that focuses upon equality and  workers' rights. It does not harm any other nations and their sovereignty. But, terrorism is anti-social, takes lives of innocent people and spreads among the nations to disturb them. So, in today's environment, it is valid to use US military power to contain terrorism in different parts of the world. But, it should be first in collaboration with the respective governments of the countries and under the mandate of united nations, even if USA is going to lead the power against terrorism. So, It will gain more acceptability and bring more peace to the world. Unilateral action by the USA in different parts of the world, can create conflict between USA and the government of that country as it is considered as an attack on the sovereignty of that nation.