WHEN THREE-QUARTERS of Americans reject a role of global policeman for the United States, perhaps they understand something fundamental about policing that Jeff Jacoby does not (“The world’s best policeman,’’ Op-ed, June 22). A police force without oversight by a judiciary and a guiding body of law is surely a formula for tyranny.
Jacoby would never endorse tyranny, but for White House occupants, who are elected by and responsible to only about 5 percent of the world’s people, to be global policemen is tantamount to being vigilantes on the global stage.
Americans would be up in arms if China or Russia took it upon themselves to be global vigilantes. For the leaders of the United States to so gladly take this role would only serve to delay the day when we have capable international judicial and policing institutions.
To say that global policing is not a proper role for the US military is not an isolationist position, but rather one that respects fundamental rights and responsibilities of democratic governance.
Charles Knight
Cambridge
The writer is codirector of the Project on Defense Alternatives at the Commonwealth Institute.
