לשם שמ’’ם

‫לשם שמיים‬

Spring 2022

World Needs Consistent US Leadership Rachel Loeb, ’24

Through recent years, the political divide in the United States has become increasingly polarized. This divide leads to dramatic policy changes from one administration to another and undermines our leadership abroad. The United States has a crucial role in the international community, and the inconsistency of successive administrations has diminished our influence on the world stage.

While some prominent Republicans support an isolationist foreign policy, the United States is only strengthened by restoring its leadership abroad.1 Given polarization and its effects, we must restore our leadership within the global community and thereby strengthen our nation.

One issue detrimentally impacted by America’s frequent policy shifts due to polarized leadership is global climate change. In 1997, President Clinton recognized this issue, initiating the effort to organize international conferences, negotiating to ensure that nearly every country would be on board with the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement mandating nations to limit their greenhouse gas emissions. Despite his efforts, the U.S. Congress formally rejected the protocol in 2001 under different leadership.2 The pendulum swung back in 2015 under President Barack Obama when the United States led the charge against climate change through the signing of the Paris Agreement. This was the first legally binding climate agreement that set a framework for how countries must reduce emissions. It was signed by the European Union and 192 countries; the only holdouts were Iran, Eritrea, Libya, Yemen and Iraq, which has since joined the agreement.3 But President Trump’s victory marked another change in the U.S.’s approach to climate policy. In 2017, the Trump administration gave the United Nations official notice that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement. As promised, the United States became the first nation to formally withdraw from the agreement in 2020, causing international condemnation and slowing progress in the fight against environmental destruction.4 America was a key architect in crafting the agreement, but it left because of the lack of ideological consistency in consecutive administrations.

Not only did this result in disappointment within the United States, but many world leaders also spoke out against America for this action. While reaffirming Germany’s commitment to the agreement, Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany at the time, stated that “The decision of the United States to pull out of the Paris Agreement is utterly regrettable, and that is me choosing very restrained language. The Paris Agreement continues to be one of the cornerstones of global cooperation, and this agreement is indispensable to reach the goals of the 2030 agenda.”5 The

Page 22

United States is the world’s second-largest carbon emitter, contributing around 12.6% of total global emissions,6 and since American pressure got nearly all other countries to comply with the Paris accord in the first place, its leaving sets a terrible and hypocritical precedent. Others may follow suit.

Fortunately, current President Joe Biden moved to re-enter the climate agreement and reassert America’s commitment and leadership to the climate change issue.7 However, America’s changing policy has damaged its relationships with key allies and will take valuable time to rebuild.

When the Covid-19 pandemic hit, the United States was ill-prepared to fight the virus because the disease was so heavily politicized. Instead of working with the international community to resolve the pandemic, the United States blamed its own failures on WHO, the World Health Organization, the United Nations agency responsible for international public health. President Trump claimed that WHO had attempted “to mislead the world when the virus was first discovered by Chinese authorities.” President Trump officially notified the United Nations that he planned to leave the World Health Organization, a decision that would threaten America’s influence as well as jeopardize global health.8 America has shipped over 540 million free vaccine doses to a total of 112 low-income countries. This is part of the Biden Administration’s commitment to donate at least 1,100,000,000 doses, which will, in turn, stop the spread of this terrible disease and prevent the emergence of new variants, perhaps even deadlier than the delta variant and more virulent than the omicron variant.9 Given its intellectual and economic resources, the United States needs to take major action on global issues, such as pandemics.10 Divided leadership and inconsistent policy hurt not only domestic issues but also poses a global problem as it threatens public health.

Another major issue on the global stage and subject to many disputes across parties is the proliferation of nuclear arms. In 2002, the George W. Bush administration alerted the world to the suspected acquisition of weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear bombs or chemical arms in Iraq. His Secretary of State, Colin Powell, informed the United Nations, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld launched a full-out war against Iraq.11 These claims were later determined to be unfounded and Powell later admitted that “the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading” but the concern of hostile or unstable countries and terrorist groups acquiring nuclear weapons remains.12 Consequently, it is vital that the international community monitor the nuclear capabilities of countries in a preventative and peaceful way.13 The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was an agreement between Iran, the United States, and several other countries in 2015.

It asserted that Iran would close its nuclear program and allow international inspections of its facilities in exchange for the end of sanctions. The relief of these sanctions would stop the $160 billion loss in oil revenue and would release their assets in the United States, around $100 billion, which had been frozen in the 1979 Iranian revolution. It is vital