Unit 2, Day 6 ~

US Foreign Policy: …toward

imperialism & interventionis

m

Agenda:• submit PLOs• receive/discuss remaining

unit handouts– Record days on each one.

• Return graded papers.• FP questionnaire –

complete & discuss – w/ opinion line

• FP flow chart – discuss• lecture notes: intro to FP

w/ annotating• If time: historiographical

reading – read & discuss

Objectives:

•Students will be able to:1. identify what caused the shift in U.S. FP, circa 1898.2. explain the causes, effects, & significance of the Spanish-American War.

•What should be the role of America’s foreign policy?

~(questionnaire)

Annotations?

• Clarifying points in the margins – e.g. definitions, examples…concise points that will help you understand the content, especially when you’re reviewing this later.

Terms to Know:Isolationism: belief that a nation should stay out of the disputes/affairs of other nations (dominant US Policy from Washington Administration to late 19th C.)Imperialism: the political, economic, or cultural influence over a region and or country. It is not necessary to control land to be imperialistic in a region, but imperialism can include land acquisition. Colonialism: when a home/mother country controls the land/governments of others (e.g. British India)Jingoism: extreme and emotional FP intertwined with chauvinism and an assertion of masculinity, often characterized by an aggressive foreign policy, accompanied by an eagerness to wage war (e.g. TR, George W. Bush et al).

What is hegemony?• → in the context

of international relations, it denotes the political-military dominance of (usually) one country over an entire region.

U.S. FP under GW = Isolationism

"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests…hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns…therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves in her politics…."

George Washington’s

Farewell Address, 1796

George Washington’s Foreign Policy:

• Isolationist!• (Farewell Address 1796):

– Warned against foreign influence and meddling in European affairs

– supported armed neutrality– supported world trade– supported only temporary

alliances with foreign nations – and only when necessary

• opposed long-term alliances

George Washington’s Farewell Address is often cited as laying the foundation for a tradition of American non-interventionism:

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to domestic nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

U.S. FP today = Interventionism

HOW DOES A NATION (X) GET ANOTHER NATION (Y) TO PURSUE THE

POLICIES IT PREFERS?

• diplomacy• economic pressure • military pressure

• (Please refer to hard copy foreign policy flow chart for more detail).

The Basics:

• In FP, countries always try to protect their own self-interest (a.k.a. “national interest”), & America has not been any different.

• In its early years - and now – the U.S. has based its FP decisions on seeking to gain economically and to protect itself from foreign invasion.

Monroe Doctrine:• doctrine = a particular

principle, position, or policy taught or advocated: (e.g. Catholic doctrines; Monroe D.)

• Def? A statement of FP issued by Pres. James Monroe (1823), declaring the U.S. would not tolerate intervention by European powers in Americas region.

Translation: 1. don’t colonize anymore LA countries, & 2. don’t intervene in any LA countries.Significance? U.S. had little intl. clout in 1823, so this did not cause immediate changes, BUT.. 1)MD did set precedent for future FP decisions re. LA. 2)It also marked 1st time U.S. laid claim (i.e. tried to control) to an area outside U.S. - (MD ex. of: unilateral proc.)

The Monroe Doctrine – why?

As Spain’s 19th c. empire and power weakened, many of its South American colonies were declaring independence.

Fearing their colonies might revolt, too, other European monarchs were ready to help the Spanish reclaim these territories….

…In response, President Monroe delivered this famous warning to European nations: Stay out of the Western Hemisphere (meaning: mostly LA)

more on The Monroe Doctrine, from AP text:

• … “Monroe’s message did not have much contemporary significance. Americans applauded it and then forgot it.

• The Monroe Doctrine might more accurately have been called the Self-Defense Doctrine. President Monroe was concerned basically with the security of his own country – not of Latin America. The U.S. has never willingly permitted a powerful foreign nation to secure a foothold near its strategic Caribbean vitals.”

• Yet the U.S. was not militarily strong at this time and relied solely on its new alliance with Great Britain for naval protection. The MD, as was often noted, was only as big as the nation’s armed forces – and no bigger.

• The MD has had a long career of ups and downs. It was never law – domestic or international. It was not, technically speaking, a pledge or an agreement. It was merely a simple, personalized statement of the policy of President Monroe. What one president says, another may unsay. And Monroe’s successors have ignored, revived, distorted , or expanded the original version. Like ivy on a tree, it has grown with America’s growth.

• But the MD in 1823 was largely an expression of the post-1812 nationalism energizing the U.S. Although directed at a specific menace in 1823, and hence a kind of period piece, the Doctrine proved to be the most famous of all the long-lived offspring of that nationalism. While giving voice to a spirit of patriotism, it simultaneously deepened the illusion of isolationism. Many Americans falsely concluded, then and later, that the Republic was in fact insulated from European dangers simply because it wanted to be and because, in a nationalistic outburst, Monroe had publicly warned the Old World Powers to stay away.

A Spirit of Empire Emerged in the U.S.

The average American wanted to be part of an empire - just as many of their

European neighbors

already were….

U.S. motivated for many reasons:

• Political: more territory/influence (basically, Manifest Destiny turned global)

• Economic: new markets & natural resources = ↑ profits

• Militaristic: coaling stations, naval bases, etc.; way to defend this new empire…Also: competition w/ Europe over colonial land grab

Contd.

• Cultural/Social/Ideological (encouraged & used to justify expansionism): Social Darwinism mindset prevailed (i.e. a paternalistic belief in superiority of Anglo-Saxon race & its responsibility to uplift inferior races – e.g. missionary spirit (desire to proselytize))

• This emerged from already-established 19th c. attitudes…

– Manifest Destiny, Turner Thesis, Social Darwinism

“Was this new imperialism merely an extension of the spirit of westward expansion/Manifest Destiny in the U.S. earlier that century? In other words,

did Americans simply apply their feelings of Manifest Destiny from the domestic to the global

sphere?”Most say yes. Turner's Frontier Thesis (1893) quickly became popular among intellectuals. It explained why the American people and American government were so different from Europeans. It sounded an alarming note about the future since the U.S. Census of 1890 had officially stated that the American frontier had broken up. The idea that the source of America's power and uniqueness was gone was a distressing concept. Many, including future president Theodore Roosevelt, believed that the end of the frontier represented the beginning of a new stage in American life - and that the United States must expand overseas. For this reason, some historians actually see the Turner Thesis as the impetus for this new wave in the history of U.S. imperialism.

An interesting perspective (albeit an unpopular one at this

time):• One opinion: Vladimir Lenin wrote:

“Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism” (1916) …in it, he argued:– countries w/ strongest capitalist

markets would dominate lesser-developed economies.

– Cap. would always expand to overseas markets, which would lead to cultural imperialism – & world economic domination…. …agree or disagree?

US FP w/ LA between 1898-1929?

= generally one-sided, dictatorial

…and deeply resented by LA

countries

U.S. FP circa 1898 was newly aggressive…or was it??

…There is also evidence that this change in U.S. FP was not so new….

~ Some examples of the Use of U.S. Armed Forces Before 1898:

•1801: Barbary War•1823: Monroe Doctrine (est. principle that W. Hemisphere → U.S. sphere of influence)•1846-48: Mexican-American War•1852-1853: Argentina•1853: Nicaragua•1853-54: Japan (Gunboat Diplomacy)•1855: Uruguay•1859: China

In short, 1898 does mark a turning point in U.S. FP at this

time – its tone changed - especially regarding LA!

Counterclaim info:• Indeed, President George Washington (1789-1797) rooted the

U.S. in isolationism.  • Throughout the 1800s, the U.S. certainly had its moments of

interventionism and even imperialism (e.g. Mexican-American War (1846-48), after which the U.S. had ceded 40% of Mexico's territory). 

• The Ostend Manifesto (1854) was a document written and supported by southern members of Congress, justifying the idea of annexing Cuba to expand its slave territories, further marking a shift in U.S. foreign policy to one of expansionism. Never came to fruition but idea was expressed.

• Bottom line? the 1800s/19th c. witnessed the U.S. slowly but steadily transitioning into a nation with an aggressively interventionist foreign policy.  – And by 1900, the U.S. – as the wealthiest, most

industrially- powerful country in the world - was industrially and economically (and, consequently, militarily) powerful enough to realize its imperialist quests.

A Spirit of Empire Emerged in the U.S.

Spanish-American War (1898)

• Who: fought between Spain & U.S.

• What: 10-wk. war

• Where: Caribbean & Pacific Ocean

• When: 1898

Spanish-American War (1898)• Why? (official causes):

– Spain controlled Cuba, & U.S. intervened to support Cuban independence from Spain (accounts of Spanish mistreatment of Cubans angered U.S.)

– explosion of U.S. battleship Maine in harbor of Havana, Cuba (which Americans blamed on Spain)

•both encouraged by yellow press (exaggerated, sensational journalism – used to sell newspapers).

– real (unofficial) cause: U.S. uncomfortable Spain controlled country so close to U.S….

African American Soldiers in S-A War:

• AAs no longer had to fight to fight, but military still racially segregated

• agency: some AA troops resisted segregation (i.e. spoke out against)

• AA soldiers won 26 Certificates of Merit & 5 Congressional Medals of Honor from S-A War.

Effects & Significance of S-A War:

• U.S. est. as world power w/ overseas territories – both for the 1st time

• Not since the Mex-Amer War (1846-48) had U.S. expanded its territory so greatly  – U.S. won easily/quickly– & acquired Puerto Rico, Guam,

Philippines – & gained temporary control over Cuba.

Effects & Significance of S-A War:

• Est. U.S. as an international superpower for 1st time• U.S. → 1st overseas territories (in Latin America &

Pacific)• cultivated its new imperialistic identity & interests for

1st time• U.S. soldiers consequently stationed outside country for

1st time – so first overseas military bases • Teddy Roosevelt = S-A War elevated him to war hero

status (cavalry member of Rough Riders in Cuba)• To a point, reunited North & South in U.S. via

patriotism/support for War

U.S. & its relationships w/ its new territories:

• To varying degrees, U.S. exerted influence/control over its newly-acquired territories: Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines.

• Cuba remained technically independent, but the U.S. imposed restrictions on the new govnt (e.g. could not involve itself in foreign alliances)– Platt Amendment (1901) = replaced earlier Teller

Amendment & stipulated conditions for withdrawal of U.S. troops, which had remained in Cuba since the Spanish–American War (1898). It also defined the terms of Cuban-U.S. relations, which remained in place until 1934 Treaty of Relations. • The Platt Amendment ensured U.S. involvement in

Cuban affairs, both foreign & domestic, and gave legal standing to U.S. claims to certain economic & military territories on Cuba, including Guantanamo Bay Naval Base.

The American Anti-Imperialist League:The American Anti-Imperialist League:

• Not all Americans supported war.

• Founded: 1899

• Mark Twain, Andrew Carnegie, WilliamJames, and WilliamJennings Bryan amongits leaders

• campaigned against annexation of Philippines and other acts of imperialism

President Theodore Roosevelt (TR)

• Assist. Sec. of Navy (McKinley); Assist. Sec. of Navy (McKinley); U.S. Pres: 1901-1909

• 1st imperialist U.S. pres., jingoist, & 1st imperialist U.S. pres., jingoist, & strongstrong American nationalistAmerican nationalist– criticized Pres. McKinley as criticized Pres. McKinley as having the backbone of having the backbone of

a chocolate éclair!a chocolate éclair!

• TR introduced concept of U.S. as intl. police power in areas where U.S. interests were threatened →came to be known as Roosevelt Corollary to Monroe

Doctrine. – Consequently, LA’s present-day image of the U.S. as an

aggressor nation stems from this turn-of-the-century FP.

TR’s FP…is most known for 3 things:

1. Big Stick Diplomacy = A strong, global military presence. Displaying Amer. military power to world would make nations think twice about fighting U.S., thus promoting global peace 2. Roosevelt Corollary = TR’s addition to MD ...more aggressive than original MD (e.g. 1902, Venezuela vs. Germany) – this sanctioned U.S. interventionism in LA!

To Europe: “Not only must you stay out of LA, but if you violate this, you will be met with U.S. military force!”

Theodore Roosevelt’s Big Stick FP continued…

• TR often expressed this belief w/ West African saying, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

• e.g.– Voyage of the Great White Fleet ,

showcasing the U.S.’ growing military might to world. • 2-yr circumnavigation of globe w/ 16 ships.

– Use of U.S. military to aid revolt in Panama (i.e. as Panamanians sought their independence from Columbia, the U.S. helped them militarily).

Route of Great White Fleet:

Panama Canal:• TR’s brain child!• = waterway across isthmus of Panama,

connecting Atlantic & Pacific Oceans.• U.S. built it from 1904-1914 (so more than one

U.S. pres. oversaw project) on territory leased from Panama.

• Conflict between the U.S. and Panama arose immediately and has centered on control of the Canal.– For additional information about the history of this conflict and

U.S.-Panama relations see: • http://www.fpif.org/reports/us_panama_policy_canal_bases_and_dollars

– A treaty was signed in 1977 (via President Jimmy Carter), returning control of the Canal Zone to Panama in 1911. Since that time, Panama has agreed to neutral operation of the canal.

Panama Canal:

How? Agreement in Panama• In 1898 the U.S. government bought up the French rights

and equipment to the canal for $40 million. The United States and the new state of Panama signed the Hay-Bunau-Varilla treaty, by which the United States guaranteed the independence of Panama and secured a perpetual lease on a 10-mile strip for the canal. Panama was to be compensated by an initial payment of $10 million and an annuity of $250,000, beginning in 1913. The U.S. helped Panama gain its independence from Colombia

• Revolution in Panama: Panamanian revolutionaries planned a revolt against Colombia. The United States assisted them. U.S. helped the rebellion succeed & recognized Panama as an independent country. New Panamanian government made lease agreement with United States. $10 million plus $250,000 a year for 99-year lease on a 10-mile wide strip of land across the isthmus.

Howard Taft & Dollar Diplomacy:

1. Dollar Diplomacy = substituted bullets for dollars, investments, loans, etc. – advancing U.S. authority/prosperity, pushing Europeans out (e.g. Panama Canal)

critics called this economic imperialism, and this continued through the 1920s

Specifics ~ Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy:

U.S. perspective:LA perspective:

• carried U.S. intervention further

• Taft extended American businessmen and bankers the full military and diplomatic support of the U.S. to protect investments in LA

• This expansion of the Roosevelt Corollary prompted him, and other U.S. presidents, to send the marines to LA at various times to maintain order.

• These ventures inspired further distrust of the U.S. in those countries.

• improved financialopportunities for American businesses

• enabled the use of private capital to further U. S. interests overseas

• belief: U.S. was to create stability and order abroad that would best promote its commercial interests

(more on) Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy:

• Whereas Theodore Roosevelt had employed “Big Stick” diplomacy to bend weaker nations to his will, William Howard Taft preferred to use money as leverage. Taft believed that he could convince smaller, developing nations to support the United States by investing American dollars in their economies. “Dollar Diplomacy,” as pundits dubbed it, not only made allies but also made money for American investors.

• For example, the U.S. dumped millions of dollars of investment into unstable Latin American countries such as Honduras, Nicaragua, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic (by assuming these countries’ debts from European banks, it enabled the U.S. to secure a foothold in LA and keep European influences out)

• …BUT the U.S. eventually had to send occupation troops to protect their investments. In short, Taft’s “Dollar Diplomacy” failed.

Republican President William Howard Taft

& his Dollar Diplomacy, the 5-Ws:• Who:

• What:

• When:

• 1. Republican President William Howard Taft• 2. American Businesses (Multi-Nationals)

• Foreign Policy that favored the assertion of American commercial and economic influences in other countries.

• Note: Dollar Diplomacy was not always peaceful. In Nicaragua, U.S. "intervention involved participating in the overthrow of one government and the military support" of another. When a revolt broke out in Nicaragua in 1912, the Taft administration quickly sided with the insurgents (who had been instigated by U.S. mining interests) and sent U.S. troops into the country to seize the customs houses.

• Started by Roosevelt, Taft continued and expanded the policy, starting in Central America, where he justified it as a means of protecting the Panama Canal, 1909 - 1913.

Republican President William Howard Taft

& his Dollar Diplomacy 5-Ws:• Wher

e:

• Why:

• Republican William Howard Taft, had practiced "Dollar Diplomacy" in Latin America and elsewhere, including China.

• Key Countries in Latin America• 1. Nicaragua• 2. Honduras• 3. Dominican Republic

• Dollar Diplomacy was based on the premise that the U.S. government should promote stability in other countries in order to provide opportunities for American investors and companies. In turn, U.S.-backed development would help ensure long-term peace and prosperity for those nations (& the U.S. would have its foot in the door to be able to control/influence these economies, governments)

Woodrow Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy (how moral was W’s

Moral Diplomacy?):• Moral Diplomacy: spreading

democracy (i.e. supporting democratic governments), promoting peace– began notion of

humanitarian Diplomacy– poor relations with Mexico! Wilson sent

U.S. soldiers to aid the nationalists in the Mexican Revolution; despite Wilson’s reluctance, he buckled to corporate pressures. Mexico accused the U.S. of adding to the slaughter of revolutionaries while exploiting M.’s resources in the name of corporate profit….

Woodrow Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy

• Pres: 1913-1921• Soon after taking office, President Woodrow Wilson

rejected the Dollar Diplomacy that had guided U.S. relations with LA during the Taft administration.

• In ways consistent with his domestic progressive reform goals and his faith in the superiority of American democracy, Wilson resolved that the U.S. would only recognize LA governments founded upon law and order, "not upon arbitrary or irregular force." Furthermore, Wilson was willing to use military force to demonstrate to Latin Americans "how to elect good men" as leaders.

Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy, pg. 1 of 3:• Although Wilson had primarily been elected to reform national politics and initiate new

progressive policies in Washington, he spent the majority of his time as President dealing with foreign policy rather than domestic. Wilson's predecessors, including McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, and Taft, had viewed the United States as an emerging power that needed to extend its influence throughout the world in order to serve national interests. This imperialist policy was justified by the commonly held belief that it was America's duty as a Christian republic to spread democracy throughout the world. These three Presidents significantly expanded America's influence abroad with the annexation of colonies throughout the world, such as the Philippines and Cuba.

• Wilson, however, abandoned this imperialist policy and brought to the White House a new way of looking at America's relations with the outside world. Even though he too believed that the United States was the most politically enlightened nation under God, he felt that all peoples throughout the world had the right to self-determination–that the people in every country should have the right to choose their own governments. Wilson, along with his Secretary of State Bryan, felt that it was America's duty to protect democracy and free peoples in other countries rather than to spread it throughout the globe.

• Prior to the outbreak of World War I, protecting democracy throughout the world primarily meant protecting the fledgling republics in Latin America that had struggled in decades past with corrupt governments, pressures from European powers, and even American imperialism under President Roosevelt. To atone for these mistakes, and to demonstrate that the United States did indeed intend to uphold the Monroe Doctrine, Wilson spent several of his first years dealing with Latin American issues. He persuaded Congress to repeal the 1912 Panama Canal Act which exempted many American ships from paying the required toll for passage through the canal. He signed a treaty with the South American country of Colombia to apologize for Roosevelt's acts of aggression during the American- driven Panama Revolution in 1903.

Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy, pg. 2 of 3:• These were Wilson's only successes in Latin American relations, however. The rest of his

dealings with South, Central, & Caribbean American countries largely failed, and many of them even resulted in bloodshed. Wilson's attempt to help Nicaraguan rebels eventually required him to occupy the country by force in 1914. The same blunder occurred in Haiti in 1915 and the Dominican Republic in 1916, when Wilson eventually sent in American troops to occupy the islands. During Wilson's Presidency, the U.S. also purchased the Virgin Islands from Denmark. It is ironic that despite his loathing of imperialism and his deep belief in self-determination, Wilson resorted to military action in Latin America just as his predecessors had.

• Although Wilson had problems in the Caribbean, his greatest challenge came from Mexico. In 1913, Mexico fell into a bloody revolution when Mexican general Victoriano Huerta overthrew the nation's government and declared himself its military dictator. Wilson immediately denounced Huerta, declaring that the U.S. could not & should not recognize violent dictators who seized governments in pursuit of their own agendas. Wilson attempted to initiate peaceful negotiations between Huerta and the usurped government, but both sides refused to submit to his proposal. Unsure how to proceed, Wilson permitted Huerta's enemies, the Constitutionalists, to purchase military equipment and arms in the U.S. in order to stage a counterrevolution….

• …When the dictator's army seized a small group of American sailors on shore leave in Mexico, Wilson demanded an apology. He also demanded that Huerta publicly salute the American flag in Mexico, which Huerta naturally refused to do. Wilson responded with force: in April 1914, he sent American Marines to take and occupy Veracruz, Mexico's primary seaport. Veracruz was taken, but eighteen Americans were killed in the battle. Not wanting to commit the U.S. to war, Wilson also requested the ABC powers–Argentina, Brazil, and Chile–to mediate the dispute. With their arbitration, the conflict was eventually resolved. Huerta fled the country, and a new government was established in 1915 under the leadership of Constitutionalist President Venustiano Carranza.

Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy, pg. 3 of 3• Despite the settlement, Wilson's Mexican troubles were not yet over. Soon after Carranza was

instated as Mexico's new president, one of his chief generals, Pancho Villa, led a 2nd revolution to depose Carranza. A 2nd bloody civil war erupted in Mexico barely after the 1st had ended. To encourage the American military to enter the conflict, Villa sent his forces into the U.S., where they destroyed the town of Columbus, New Mexico, and killed 19 Americans. This produced the reaction Villa sought: within days of the raid on Columbus, Wilson sent the Punitive Expedition of 5,000 U.S. Army regulars, led by General John J. Pershing, into Mexico to find Villa.

• Within a month, Pershing and his men had traveled over 300 miles south into the heart of Mexico in an unsuccessful pursuit of Villa. Wilson ignored President Carranza's threats of war, and the two armies eventually clashed on April 12, 1916, and again on June 21, 1916. Both countries prepared for war; Wilson mustered 100,000 troops on the border in Texas. Fortunately, however, war was averted when Carranza petitioned for mediation. An agreement was reached in early January 1917 when Wilson recalled Pershing and officially recognized Carranza's govnt.

• Yet, despite his troubles in the Caribbean and with Mexico, President Wilson did not fail entirely. Prior to World War I, he did have a few minor foreign policy successes besides those in Panama. Though he was forced to abandon his belief in self determination in Nicaragua, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic, Wilson was successful in persuading Congress to pass the Jones Act in 1916, which gave the American-occupied Philippines Islands significantly more political autonomy. He also encouraged Chinese independence–unlike McKinley, Roosevelt, and Taft, who had all sought to increase American influence in East Asia at China's expense–and supported China in a territorial dispute with Japan.

• These early exercises in foreign policy, although they appeared dire at the time, proved to be mere tests for Wilson compared to problems he faced in his second term. Within a year of Wilson's second inauguration, Europe collapsed into the deadliest war conceivable, and the rest of the world soon followed. It eventually fell on Wilson to determine America's course of action, the outcome of the Great War, and the new world order that would emerge.

Counterclaim: However, one can also argue that there were some effects of U.S. interventionist policies in LA that had positive effects for LAs:

• In first 100 years of Monroe Doctrine…– When France & England sought to acquire territory on

Yucatan Peninsula (1848), U.S. protested and protected this region, securing local (& sometimes indigenous) autonomy.

– 1851: U.S. prevented British from gaining control of Nicaragua.

– The U.S. helped Venezuela retain its established borders during a dispute with British Guiana in 1895.

– Panama Canal (opened in 1914) stimulated trade between U.S. & LA

• Panama Canal impetus for development of Panamanian infrastructure (e.g. roads to deliver and receive cargo)

– These occurrences pleased many LAs & diminished European influence in the region (= good for U.S.).

Between 1898 - 1928, U.S. relations with LA were mostly strained, but relations would

improve w/ Presidents Herbert Hoover and FDR (& especially

FDR) – i.e. in the 1920s & 1930s….

To what extent was the U.S. involved in LA circa 1898 - 1929?

• From 1898-1932, U.S. intervened militarily in nine LA nations, a total of 34 times….

• Economic intervention: – By 1914, U.S. had $336 million invested in

Cuba & W. Indies; $93 million in Central Amer.; over $1 billion in Mexico, & considerable influence in region

• Military intervention:– 1912: Taft ordered 2,700 marines to land in

Nicaragua to protect pro-American regime against rebels

– 1st use of U.S. military to suppress a foreign revolution.• President Hoover eventually withdrew these U.S.

soldiers after 20 years of being there.

President

Herbert Hoover & Latin America

:

• President Hoover was troubled over the poor relationship the U.S. had with is southern neighbors.

• 1928: took goodwill tour of LA…granted, it was on a U.S. battleship, but this was MUCH more than his predecessors had done.

• Hoover strove to abandon the interventionist twist given to the Monroe Doctrine by Theodore Roosevelt. – e.g. In 1932 he negotiated a new treaty with

the French-speaking people of Haiti, and this pact, later supplanted by an executive agreement, provided for the complete withdrawal of American platoons by 1934.

– Furthermore, in 1933 Hoover’s efforts saw the last U.S. soldiers sailing away from Nicaragua after a 20-year military presence there.

• Hoover’s foreign policy efforts in LA are noteworthy and significant because he paved the way for his successor’s (FDR) Good Neighbor Policy….

FDR’s Good Neighbor Policy:• The Good Neighbor policy was a policy of "love thy

neighbor." The United States wished to have good relations with its neighbors, especially at a time when conflicts were beginning to rise in the world once again.

• This act was more or less intended to garner Latin American support, mostly during FDR Administration: 1933-45

• Renouncing unpopular military intervention, the U.S. shifted to other methods to maintain its influence in Latin America: it sough to mitigate anti-Americanism, support strong local leaders, the training of national guards, economic and cultural penetration, export-import Bank loans, financial supervision, and political subversion.

• The GNP meant that United States would still keep its eye on Latin America but in a more peaceful, politically-correct manner.

• On March 4, 1933, FDR stated during his inaugural address that: "In the field of world policy I would dedicate this nation to the policy of the good neighbor--the neighbor who resolutely respects himself and, because he does so, respects the rights of others.“

• This position was affirmed by Cordell Hull, FDR's Secretary of State in 1933…Hull said: "No country has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another.“

Past P3 Exam Question:

The Spanish-American War of 1898 was a turning point in relations between theUnited States and Latin America.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Most answers are likely to agree that the war was a turning point…but remember the multiple perspective requirement.•Thesis and subtopics…?

Conclusion:

In the late 19th c. (circa 1898) American foreign policy shifted away from one rooted in isolationism to one of expansionism and interventionism.