Us Imperialism Essay, Research Paper
Under the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 the United States had policed the hemisphere, in theory to preserve the independence of its nations from European covetousness, in reality to protect America s own interests. This often involved military intervention, especially in Central America and the Caribbean. The Monroe Doctrine was based on the reasoning that the Caribbean was America s inland sea and part of the economic structure. In Cuba, which America had liberated Spain, the US right of intervention was actually written into the Cuban constitution, through the so-called Platt Amendment . The reason behind the American imperial upsurge is mainly an economic issue: coincided with recovery from the Civil War, the U.S. started to expand in late 19th century. However, the American expansion into Latin America can also be attributed to nationalistic causes that go beyond the economic spectrum. Thus, U.S. expansion into Latin America was a result of U.S. economic expansion and rising nationalism.
American policy toward Latin America has changed over time to accommodate burgeoning American economic activities in the region.(1) During the early years of the nineteenth century, U.S. commerce with its southern neighbors demanded little more than policing the Caribbean for marauding pirates. As the United States grew into a commercial, industrial, and, eventually, financial power, its foreign policy broadened in scope.(2) The hunt for new markets brought it into competition with European nations, especially Great Britain. As a result, it became one of the major aims of American policy to check the further penetration of European commerce and capital into Latin America. By the turn of the century, Latin America had become not only a substantial market for American products but an important source of raw materials and a major area for capital investment as well. Having recently built a powerful navy, the United States assumed the responsibility of protecting American commerce and investment by forcibly maintaining order in the region.(3) Uninvited, it assumed the role of policeman of the Western Hemisphere. In this capacity, the United States focused its attention on the weak and chaotic nations of the Caribbean and Central America, where American economic activity was concentrated.(4) It is important to note that American intervention in Latin America did not begin to full scale until the 1890 s even though the Manifest Destiny was declared in 1823. American military weakness, lack of information, and British predominance in the area had limited U.S. activities in Latin America. However, the war against Spain in 1898 established the United States as a full-fledged imperial power.(5) The primary goal of its Cuban policy during the 1890 s was to protect the very large (over $50 million) U.S. investment in the island by stopping the chronic political disorder there. When Spain proved unable to end the turmoil, and it appeared that ungovernable native rebels might take over, the United States intervened.(6) In declaring war against Spain, the United States Congress pledged to free Cuba from Spanish tyranny and in the Teller Resolution disavowed any intention to annex the island. The U.S., instead of bringing the Cubans liberty and economic progress, U.S. intervention promoted and perpetuated corruption, violence, and economic stagnation.(7) Thus, the Spanish American War had marked the public inception of American economic dominance in Latin America. Let us now refer to specific historians for their specific views on this issue. According to Paul Kennedy, the United States thrust itself upon the global stage at the end of the nineteenth century in an imperial surge that followed three decades of impressive post-Civil War economic growth.(8) By the end of the 1890 s the United States had matched and even surpassed the leading European powers in agricultural and industrial productivity and technological prowess. He claims that wealth usually underpins military power, and military power is usually needed to acquire and defend empire.(9) However, Michael H. Hunt argues that material strength alone does not explain why the United States expanded. Hunt makes case that ideas matter in foreign policy, and in his view, Americans were so aggressively proud of their nation and so racist toward nonwhite peoples that they believed they could remake foreign societies.(10) Americans looked at their liberty and economic growth as signs that they were destined to be great and to lead others whom they judged racially inferior.(11) Ideas pushed the United States outward and justified the tutelage of others. In the American ideology, national greatness, racial supremacy, commercial prosperity, military security, and territorial expansion went hand in hand.(12) Furthermore, LaFeber refutes the familiar thesis that jingoistic yellow journalism stampeded leaders into war.(13) Instead, he emphasizes that McKinley was a conservative capitalist closely connected to businesspeople who wanted to build a commercial empire in Latin America.(14) He argues that the American business community helped push McKinley to a war decision. It is clear that U.S. intervention in Latin America was mainly economic.
From 1898 to 1932, the Unites States intervened militarily in nine Caribbean nations a total of thirty-four times.(15) The U.S. justified its actions by the so-called Roosevelt Corollary (1904) to the Monroe Doctrine, so names because President Roosevelt maintained that the Unites States, as a .civilized x nation, had the right to end .chronic wrongdoing x and thus could intervene in the Caribbean to maintain order.(16) The Roosevelt Corollary was a logical way outgrowth of the increasingly aggressive policies. Lewis L. Gould sharply rejects the view that the United States succumbed to war hysteria in 1898. He argues instead that William McKinley was a tenacious diplomat who gave Spain every chance to avoid war over Cuba, which had been in revolt against its imperial master since 1895.(17) The quest for national security and humanitarianism, not irrationality, compelled the United States to resolve the Cuban issue, according to him.(18) Furthermore, true to its Teller Amendment pledge, the United States did not annex Cuba. The United States did occupy the island nation until 1902, however, and forced Cubans to accept the Platt Amendment, which gave the U.S. government the right to supervise Cuba s external affairs and internal policies.(19) The amendment also required Cuba to cede a military base (Guantanamo Bay) to the United States. Thereafter, under the aegis of the Platt Amendment, American troops repeatedly intervened in Cuba.(20) Louis A. Perez Jr. offers the provocative interpretation that the United States joined the war against Spain, which the Cubans were already winning, in order to prevent Cuban independence. In his treatment of the impact of U.S. imperialism on Cuba, Perez finds that American authorities manipulated politics and suppressed nationalistic appeals for full independence.(21) And as North American investors rapidly gained control over the island s wealth, Cuba also lost its economic sovereignty.(22) In his view, he attributes both economic and nationalistic reasons for U.S. expansion, although he disapproves of the humanitarian claim of U.S. imperialism. The economic aspect of U.S. intervention is too transcendental that there seems to be no other major reason behind this except for perhaps nationalism. However, it is important to note the importance that U.S. Presidents such as Teddy Roosevelt had perverted the Monroe Doctrine. Roosevelt s corollary, though tacked onto the Monroe Doctrine, bore only a strained relation to the original dictum of 1823.(23) Monroe had in effect said to the Europeans, .Thou shalt not intervene. x TR changed this warning to mean, .We shall intervene to prevent you from intervening. x(24) The Roosevelt doctrine was actually so radical as to be a completely new policy, says Bailey and Kennedy, but it gained readier acceptance by being associated with the honored name Monroe. Yet in its own right the corollary had considerable merit as a preemptive stroke. As time wore on, the new corollary was used to justify wholesale interventions and repeated landings of the marines, all of which helped turn the Caribbean into a .Yankee lake. x(25) According to these historical facts we can deduce that the U.S. intervention was indeed beyond the economic spectrum. Nationalism and imperialism both play an integral part although the economic aspect is the main one.
The cause of U.S. expansion starting with the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 and the full implementation of imperialism with the Spanish American War in 1898 is quite clear. The North American continent had been fully settled, the economy had fully recovered from the Civil War, the industrial revolution had completely set in, and also the military had been fully developed. The next step was obviously Latin America. The expansion of its economy needed new markets, and businesses had already expanded outward. Although there are some opposing views, it is an accepted fact that the U.S. expanded because of economic and nationalistic reasons, and the period coincided with prosperity in its domestic sector.
324