Latin American History – 1791 to Present Unit 4 ReviewU.S. Interventionism in Latin America (1880-1930)

Historical Context

• Late 19th and early 20th centuries marked a period of increased U.S. involvement in Latin American affairs
• U.S. emerged as a global power after the Spanish-American War (1898)
• Theodore Roosevelt's "Big Stick" diplomacy asserted U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere
• The Roosevelt Corollary (1904) to the Monroe Doctrine justified U.S. intervention in Latin America
• U.S. sought to protect its economic interests and maintain political stability in the region
• The Panama Canal's construction (1904-1914) heightened U.S. strategic interest in Central America and the Caribbean
• U.S. interventionism coincided with the rise of "banana republics" and the influence of U.S. corporations (United Fruit Company)

Key Concepts and Terms

• Dollar Diplomacy: U.S. foreign policy that prioritized economic interests and used financial incentives to achieve political goals
• Gunboat Diplomacy: The use or threat of naval force to advance U.S. interests and influence foreign governments
• Sphere of Influence: A region where a dominant power exercises political, economic, and military control
• Banana Republic: A pejorative term for a country with a politically unstable and economically dependent government, often reliant on a single export commodity (bananas)
• The Roosevelt Corollary: An addition to the Monroe Doctrine that asserted the U.S. right to intervene in Latin American countries to maintain stability and protect U.S. interests
• The Platt Amendment (1901): A U.S.-imposed amendment to the Cuban constitution that granted the U.S. the right to intervene in Cuban affairs and establish a naval base at Guantanamo Bay
• The Panama Canal: A strategic waterway connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, constructed by the U.S. after supporting Panama's independence from Colombia

Major U.S. Interventions

• Cuba (1898-1902): U.S. military intervention during the Spanish-American War led to Cuban independence but with significant U.S. influence through the Platt Amendment
• Panama (1903): U.S. supported Panama's independence from Colombia to secure control over the Panama Canal Zone
• Nicaragua (1912-1933): U.S. marines occupied Nicaragua to protect U.S. business interests and support the conservative government against liberal revolutionaries
  • The Bryan-Chamorro Treaty (1914) granted the U.S. exclusive rights to build a canal across Nicaragua
• Haiti (1915-1934): U.S. marines occupied Haiti following political instability, controlling the country's finances and government
• Dominican Republic (1916-1924): U.S. military occupation in response to political unrest and to protect U.S. economic interests
• Mexico (1914-1917): U.S. military interventions, including the occupation of Veracruz, during the Mexican Revolution to protect U.S. interests and influence the political outcome

Motivations Behind Interventionism

• Economic interests: U.S. sought to protect and expand its business investments and trade relationships in Latin America
  • U.S. companies (United Fruit Company) had significant stakes in the region's agricultural and natural resource sectors
• Political stability: U.S. aimed to maintain friendly governments and prevent the spread of political ideologies (communism) perceived as threats to U.S. interests
• Strategic concerns: The U.S. wanted to secure its geopolitical dominance in the Western Hemisphere and prevent European powers from gaining influence
• Racial and cultural biases: U.S. policymakers often viewed Latin American countries as inferior and in need of guidance, reflecting prevailing attitudes of the time
• Domestic politics: U.S. presidents and politicians used interventionism to bolster their popularity and demonstrate American power on the global stage

Impact on Latin American Countries

• Political instability: U.S. interventions often led to the overthrow of governments and the installation of U.S.-friendly regimes, contributing to long-term political instability
• Economic dependence: U.S. economic dominance and control over key industries (agriculture, mining) hindered the development of diverse and self-sufficient economies in Latin American countries
• Social and cultural impact: U.S. military occupations and political influence affected local societies, often leading to resentment and anti-American sentiment
• Sovereignty and self-determination: U.S. interventionism undermined the sovereignty and autonomy of Latin American nations, limiting their ability to shape their own political and economic futures
  • The Platt Amendment and the Bryan-Chamorro Treaty exemplified U.S. constraints on Cuban and Nicaraguan sovereignty
• Resistance and nationalist movements: U.S. interventions sparked resistance and nationalist movements in Latin American countries, such as the Sandino rebellion in Nicaragua (1927-1933)

U.S. Foreign Policy Shifts

• Good Neighbor Policy (1933): President Franklin D. Roosevelt announced a shift away from military interventionism and towards non-intervention and cooperation with Latin American countries
  • U.S. withdrew troops from Haiti, Dominican Republic, and Nicaragua
  • The policy aimed to improve relations and promote economic and cultural exchange
• Pan-Americanism: U.S. promoted cooperation and solidarity among American nations through initiatives like the Pan-American Union and inter-American conferences
• World War II collaboration: Many Latin American countries allied with the U.S. during the war, leading to increased cooperation and a temporary reduction in tensions
• Cold War interventionism: After World War II, U.S. foreign policy in Latin America focused on containing the spread of communism, leading to covert operations and support for anti-communist governments (Guatemala 1954, Chile 1973)

Resistance and Reactions

• Latin American intellectual and political movements: Writers, artists, and politicians in Latin America criticized U.S. interventionism and advocated for sovereignty and self-determination
  • The Uruguayan writer José Enrique Rodó's "Ariel" (1900) contrasted Latin American spirituality with U.S. materialism
• Anti-imperialist sentiment: U.S. interventions fueled anti-imperialist and anti-American attitudes among Latin American populations
• Nationalist and revolutionary movements: U.S. interventionism sparked nationalist and revolutionary movements that sought to challenge U.S. influence and assert national independence
  • Augusto César Sandino's rebellion against U.S. occupation in Nicaragua (1927-1933)
  • The Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) had elements of resistance to U.S. influence
• Diplomatic efforts: Some Latin American governments sought to counter U.S. interventionism through diplomatic means, such as the Drago Doctrine (1902) which opposed the use of force to collect debts

Legacy and Long-Term Consequences

• Strained U.S.-Latin American relations: The legacy of U.S. interventionism has contributed to a complex and often tense relationship between the U.S. and many Latin American countries
• Economic inequality and underdevelopment: U.S. economic dominance and support for elite-led governments have contributed to persistent economic inequality and hindered sustainable development in Latin America
• Political instability and authoritarianism: U.S. interventions and support for friendly regimes have contributed to cycles of political instability and the emergence of authoritarian governments in some Latin American countries
• Ongoing debates over sovereignty and U.S. influence: The history of U.S. interventionism continues to shape discussions about sovereignty, self-determination, and the appropriate role of the U.S. in Latin American affairs
• Cultural and intellectual responses: Latin American writers, artists, and scholars have grappled with the legacy of U.S. interventionism, producing works that critique imperialism and assert cultural identity (Gabriel García Márquez, Pablo Neruda)
• Lessons for U.S. foreign policy: The mixed outcomes and long-term consequences of U.S. interventionism in Latin America have prompted debates about the effectiveness and morality of such policies, influencing discussions on U.S. foreign policy in other regions.