After reading
Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman’s American Umpire, I realized how effective the United
States has served as the world’s umpire. If you asked me the question before I
read this book, Is the United States an empire? I would have answered yes with
little hesitation. Now I am going to explain why my preconceived notion was
wrong, and why America is an Umpire for the world and not an empire.
The first thing
you need to know is what is an “Umpire.” No, I do not mean the old guy who
stands behind the home plate at a baseball game. An umpire is
“
having
the authority to decide finally a controversy or question between parties.”
This definition is fitting to the United States right? The most powerful
country in the world is certainly going to have the ability decide the outcome in
a controversy between nations. There is
a reason at the Major-League Baseball World Series this October that the umpire
will be someone who is qualified and not a third-grade student at A.E. Phillips
Elementary School. The same reason the United States is the Umpire of the world
and Uganda is not!
Which brings me to my next point, Should
the United States serve as the Umpire to the world? Why can’t China or Russia
be the Umpire? They are superpowers with capability of umpiring the world. Oh
yeah, they are communist and don’t stand for things like “Freedom” and
“Democracy” as Americans do. Cobbs Hoffman touches on who really should be the
Umpire. She says, “Ideally, the UN
should act as an umpire, but too often it lacks the coherence and independent
resources necessary to the task.“ So why does the United States serve as the
Umpire to world? It’s simple; America wants to preserve their beliefs and
freedoms. If the United States just sat back on its continent, oceans away from
other powerful countries, like George Washington advised in his farewell
address. Then countries with imperialistic visions would gain an edge on the
United States.
Opponents will disagree and say the United
States only meddles with other countries because they are an empire and hungry
for oil and money. Cobbs Hoffman says from “1898 to 1946 was the one and only
period in which the United States sustained an empire”. My counter to this argument is why would the
United States want to be the umpire of the world other than preserving their
beliefs and freedoms? With great power comes great responsibility and
headaches. Again, the baseball umpire analogy plays true. For example, an
umpire sometimes makes the wrong call that could alter the outcome of the game.
If the United States does not make the right call on a foreign policy on
foreign policy situations the consequences can be tragic. In American Umpire,
Elizabeth Cobbs Hoffman agrees with my thought by stating, “The umpire role
also carried substantial costs in blood, treasure, and identity that generally
were not shared by others that benefited significantly under the new global
order. “ In history, “empire” originally designated
two ubiquitous types of government that incorporated and commanded obedience
from people who generally did not wish to yield it and who continued to seek
political release after their annexation. This definition does not fit the United
States in the slightest degree. If this was true then the United States would
have a much larger country (land size wise) because it certainly has the power
and capability to do this. Instead, the United States likes to serve as an
arbitrator and not an imperialistic nation.
Umpiring
is a no win situation. If you mess up everyone says “Shame on you”; if you do
happen to make all the correct calls, everyone says, “That’s your job or You’re
supposed to make the correct calls” Umpiring exposes one to criticism,
second-guessing, and dissection. Until the United Nations has the resources and
ability to step us as the true Global Umpire, the United States will take on
the responsibility. Umpiring is in and will forever be in the United States of
America’s culture and DNA.
