Libertarian perspectives on foreign intervention

Libertarian perspectives on foreign intervention range from supportive, when the perceived threat of the foreign nation warrants an act of self-defense, to opposition to government actions that intervene in the internal affairs of other nations. Libertarian pacifists hold that such intervention can never be justified because war expands government and its encroachments on the lives, liberty and property of domestic citizens and foreign peoples. Others argue that, due to globalization, conditions in another nation will inevitably other nations and intervention is part of national defense.

Others also argue that since the primary duty of a state is to prevent people from depriving others of their freedom, a state should step in—where reasonably possible and not to the detriment of its citizens—to rectify situations resulting from another state not having performed this duty for its own citizens. Some libertarians who reject nationalism claim that a libertarian state should protect the freedoms of all people, even those that do not live within its borders. Others deny that interventionist foreign policy actually protects foreigners, on balance, more than it disrupts and destroys their lives. This group views the state as incompetent, dangerous and malevolent in external affairs as it is in the domestic sphere, if not more, and tends to oppose the notion of "collateral damage" being acceptable.

One specific example of foreign involvement that is especially controversial is Israel. According to "Free Radical", "Some libertarians believe it deserves all the financial support it gets. Other libertarians believe that Arabs wouldn't hate us enough to strap bombs if it weren't for our outspoken support of Israel and presence in the region." The Ayn Rand Institute, though not libertarian itself, is very influential in libertarian thought, and supports Israel. [http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_america_at_war_israeli_arab_conflict In Moral Defense of Israel] Ayn Rand Institute] In regard to intervention for the purposes of liberation, Rand says "Dictatorship nations are outlaws. Any free nation has the right to invade...any...slave pen. Whether a free nation chooses to do so or not is a matter of its own self-interest, not of respect for the non-existent 'rights' of gang rulers. It is not a free nation's duty to liberate other nations at the price of self-sacrifice, but a free nation has the right to do it, when and if it so chooses." (Ayn Rand, from "The Virtue of Selfishness") The paleolibertarian LewRockwell.com opposes U.S. support for Israel and intervention in the region in general. [http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/kinsella5.html New Israel: A win-win-win proposal] Lew Rockwell]

References

External links

* [http://jeffreyalanmiron.typepad.com/jeffrey_alan_miron/2006/05/intervention_in.html Jeffrey Alan Miron - Intervention in Darfur?] - 10/05/06
* [http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j050302.html "Long Live Libertarianism!" by Justin Raimondo]
* [http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard84.html Lew Rockwell.com - War and Foreign Policy] by Murray N. Rothbard
* [http://www.lp.org/lpnews/article_762.shtml The Libertarian Party - U.S. in Iraq: War or welfare project?] by Mark Selzer 18/05/05
* [http://drizzten.com/blargchives/000095.html Magnifisyncopathological - Tony Woodlief on Libertarianism III] - 18/11/02
* [http://fairshot.typepad.com/fairshot/2005/08/libertarians_fo.html Paperwright's Fair Shot - Libertarians For Foreign Intervention] - 14/08/05
* [http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2006/07/the_fatal_conce.html Samizdata.net - The fatal conceits of foreign intervention] by Jonathan Pearce 15/07/06