The question of whether or not the U.S. should involve itself in foreign wars, disputes and the internal affairs of other countries is one that has been debated for centuries. While intervention is often presented as “necessary” for global stability by our government, it is in our best interest for the U.S. to stay out of foreign policy.

One of the most notable reasons why the U.S. should not intervene in foreign conflicts is the cost alone. It is estimated that U.S. wars since 9/11, including Iraq, Afghanistan and other similar deployments have cost the U.S. more than $8 trillion. These numbers not only include military expenses, but also long-term obligations for the government such as healthcare for veterans and post-conflict reconstruction.

In addition to the monetary cost is the toll of human life on both sides of the conflict. It has been proven in the decades, through studies, such as the Lancet surveys on the Iraq War, that the estimated number of excess Iraqi deaths resulting from the violence created  by the U.S., was nearing the hundreds of thousands. Additionally, millions more suffered because of disrupted infrastructure. It is also shown that these wars have contributed to nearly 4.7 million deaths worldwide, counting both direct and indirect deaths. Considering that by 2013 more than half of the Americans surveyed about deployment in Iraq considered it to be a “mistake” shows the superfluity of the deployment overseas.

In recent years the escalation of the Israel-Palestine conflict, along with Venezuela has raised serious questions from citizens around the world. The U.S. provides more than $3 billion worth of aid to Israel yearly, and this persists even as civilian casualties in Gaza have surged. By doing this America is seemingly tying itself rather closely to a high-interest conflict while simultaneously damaging its global reputation. 

The U.S’s continuous violations of national sovereignty is another significant concern. A recent survey by the Cato Institute shows that foreign military intervention in regional issues often accelerates instability rather than calming it. As seen recently with the US regime change of Venezuela, the U.S military actions have been heavily criticized by foreign advisors and the United Nations. Along with a 33% approval rating of U.S. Occupation along with 63% of Americans saying that the U.S. is getting too involved. 

Regime changes can also cause the rise of foreign extremist groups similar to that of U.S. intervention in Libya and Iraq. In 2013, ISIS was formed in response to the US’s invasion of Iraq, and due to U.S. deployment the amount of people in these extremist groups increased significantly due to anti-American sentiment within these areas.

Foreign intervention also has domestic implications. Many Americans prefer that their government focus more on pressing internal issues, such as creating affordable healthcare, creating sustainable infrastructure and economic stability, rather than funding and fighting in wars that have no effect on the U.S. Surveys show that a significant amount of U.S. citizens believe that the U.S should “deal with its own problems and let other nations deal with their own.” When resources that can be used to fix the U.S’s own problems are being diverted to other issues that don’t impact the general well being of the country and its citizens, public support for intervening in and funding these wars often begin to fall, as it is in U.S. best interest to focus and fix their own problems

Even though the U.S has often justified foreign intervention and funding as a means to promote stability across the world, it is evident that such involvement carries heavy costs with no guarantee that it will succeed. Instead of repeatedly funding wars and deploying troops, the U.S. should listen to the concerns of its own citizens and should prioritize domestic issues rather than foreign ones.

While the U.S. should not intervene militarily in other nations, it also has a responsibility to spread its wealth to other democracies. The U.S. is the richest and third most populous country on Earth, and has been one of the world’s super powers since the end of World War II. It should be our nation’s responsibility to give back to the world, rather than to isolate itself.

The main reason why the U.S. should provide assistance and aid abroad is that helping other nations would be the right thing to do. The U.S. is the oldest existing democracy, and has two and a half centuries worth of experience to share with other countries. The American Revolution against Great Britain spurred similar revolutions throughout Latin America, with their new governing documents taking heavy inspiration from the U.S. Constitution. 

America should not fund revolution, however it would be beneficial to help improve those countries’ systems of government once they are independent. The United States Agency for International Development spent around $3 billion on democratic aid before its demise in early 2025, which came at the hands of DOGE’s budget cuts. A majority of Americans are in favor of defending human rights abroad and most agree the U.S. should support democratic ideals in the world. The American people believe that the U.S. should encourage the ideals of self determination and democracy throughout the world, and the government should follow suit.

Another major reason that America should continue to be involved abroad is how such involvement would expand the U.S.’s foreign power. The Marshall Plan is the best example of how American influence abroad benefits both parties. The Marshall Plan provided over $13 billion to rebuild western Europe after World War II, resulting in participating countries’ economies recovering by as much as $2 for every $1 invested. Nine of the world’s 25 largest economies and four of the top 10, received aid from the Marshall Plan.

Historically, the world’s superpowers have deployed troops and caused injustice in countries they are involved in. Examples include the British in the 13 Colonies and India, The U.S.S.R. in the Eastern Bloc, and even America in Vietnam and Nicaragua. The U.S. should not have military involvement in other nations, but instead should support foreign nations through trade, financials and assistance. American-backed rebuildings in East Asia after the Second World War show how aid in other countries can create strong bonds that span decades. South Korea, Japan and Taiwan were all rebuilt heavily by the U.S. after World War II and remain close allies with the U.S., and all three have become prosperous, developed nations.

Assisting in the development of nations around the world is also in the U.S.’s best interests because improved living conditions and relief in under-developed nations increases the safety of both the U.S. and the countries receiving aid. As described by the George W. Bush Presidential Center, foreign aid from the U.S. decreases the likelihood that the people in those countries will be radicalized, as better living conditions and increased stability reduces the risk of radicalization. This is a win-win, as the country receiving aid can develop is less likely to see civil strife, and the U.S. does not have to worry about a country falling into civil war and having a faction blame the U.S. It would also decrease the chance for one of America’s enemies, like Russia or China, to swoop in and position themselves as a savior, meaning the U.S. would gain an ally and possibly take one from its rivals.

If the U.S. wants to be the “City on a Hill” described by Reagan and Obama, it must shine the light of democracy out toward the world around it. Not only because it is in our best interests, but because it is the right thing to do.