Fact Check: The U.S. has historically upheld the prohibition on territorial conquest
What We Know
The claim that the U.S. has historically upheld the prohibition on territorial conquest is supported by various legal frameworks and historical actions. The cornerstone of this prohibition is found in the United Nations Charter, which explicitly bans the use or threat of force in international relations, with the only exception being self-defense (source-1). This legal framework has been a significant part of the international order since World War II, marking a departure from earlier practices of territorial conquest.
Moreover, the prohibition against annexations is described as foundational to modern international law, which has evolved to prioritize the stability of state boundaries and the principle of self-determination (source-2). The U.S. has played a crucial role in establishing and maintaining this norm, particularly through its security commitments and diplomatic efforts.
Analysis
While the U.S. has indeed supported the prohibition on territorial conquest, the application of this principle has not always been consistent. For instance, the U.S. has been involved in military interventions and actions that some critics argue contradict its stated commitment to this principle. Events such as the annexation of Hawaii in 1898 and the ongoing debates surrounding U.S. actions in territories like Puerto Rico and Guam illustrate complexities in the U.S. stance on territorial integrity (source-1).
The reliability of sources discussing the prohibition of territorial conquest is generally high, as they are rooted in established international law and scholarly analysis. However, interpretations of the U.S.'s adherence to these norms can vary significantly based on political perspectives. Critics often highlight instances where U.S. foreign policy appears to undermine its commitment to these principles, suggesting a selective application of the prohibition (source-2).
Conclusion
The claim that the U.S. has historically upheld the prohibition on territorial conquest is Partially True. While there is a strong legal and historical basis for the U.S. supporting this prohibition, the application of these principles has been inconsistent. The U.S. has both championed the prohibition in international forums and engaged in actions that challenge its commitment to this norm. Thus, while the U.S. has played a significant role in promoting the prohibition, its record is not without contradictions.