US and Latin America

Roosevelt Corollary and US-Latin America Relations

• Roosevelt Corollary:

  • Claims the role of the United States as an international police power in Latin America.

  • Established the U.S. doctrine that justified intervention in Latin American nations under the guise of stability and moral authority.

• Insularity to Intervention:

  • The United States transitioned from an isolationist stance to one of expansion, asserting influence over Latin America under the motto "America for Americans".

  • Historian Jules Benjamin refers to this phenomenon as the "moral elasticity of U.S. power", which highlights the evolving justifications for American interventionism.

• Economic Intervention and Reform:

  • The U.S. did not need to conquer Latin American regions militarily; reform could be achieved by leading through example.

  • U.S. companies controlled major infrastructures in Latin America, such as mills in Cuba and telegraph networks across Central America.

  • This led to questions about sovereignty: "What happens when your infrastructure is owned by another country?"

  • This control is termed neocolonialism.

• Dependency and Economic Control:

  • The U.S. banking and consulting firms dictated credit terms and conditions to Latin American republics, leading to their economic vulnerability.

  • In cases of default or economic fluctuation, U.S. military intervention was often employed under the pretext of ensuring fiscal responsibility, illustrating the blend of morality and gunboat diplomacy.

The Influence of Moral Power and Imperial Modernity

• Concept of Imperial Modernity:

  • Defined by the fusion of fiscal responsibility and moral interventionism in Latin America.

  • The U.S. engaged with the region using a language of progress while demanding obedience to its economic models.

• The Role of U.S. Economic Expansion:

  • The U.S. expanded its economic reach to capitalize on Latin American resources such as copper, oil, and sugar.

  • Latin American elites required U.S. capital to modernize their economies, creating a complex relationship that was both symbiotic and exploitative.

• Revolutionary Dynamics:

  • The Mexican Revolution (1910) showcased the push for sovereignty reflecting the struggles against foreign economic domination.

  • Emiliano Zapata emerged as a key figure advocating for land reform based on the principle "the land belongs to those who work it", a direct challenge to capitalist ownership.

  • The U.S. viewed revolutionary movements as threats to its vested economic interests and responded with protective actions such as military presence.

U.S. Military Interventions and Ideology

• 1914 Intervention in Veracruz:

  • U.S. Marines occupied Veracruz to intervene under the pretext of moral protection amidst a turbulent political climate in Mexico during World War I.

  • The underlying motive was to stabilize the region to protect American economic interests.

• Shifts in Diplomatic Language:

  • Over time, the U.S. began merging moral rhetoric with strategic necessity, employing an ethical vocabulary to justify its imperial actions.

  • The language of democracy became a means through which the U.S. could assert its influence, affecting perceptions of sovereignty in Latin America.

Economic Nationalism and the Good Neighbor Policy

• Post-World War I Economic Context:

  • The economic devastation following World War I led to a realization in Latin America of its dependency on global trade networks.

  • Countries began promoting domestic interests and sought control over their natural resources, leading to the first wave of economic nationalism.

• Franklin D. Roosevelt's Good Neighbor Policy:

  • Established to improve relations with Latin America and reduce military interventions by promoting economic partnerships.

  • The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act of 1934 was a critical step, enabling tariff reductions and fostering trade relationships while deepening economic dependence.

• Cultural Diplomacy and Soft Power:

  • Figures like Nelson Rockefeller promoted Latin American culture in the U.S. as a form of soft power to build relations.

  • Inter-American conferences emphasized collaboration, but often at a price of political alignment with U.S. interests.

World War II and Evolving Dynamics

• Military Terms in the Good Neighbor Policy:

  • As World War II loomed, the rhetoric around mutual cooperation evolved into military alliances to deter Axis influences.

  • U.S. military installations and cooperation increased in Latin America, framed as protective actions rather than impositions.

• Latin American Participation in World War II:

  • Countries like Brazil engaged actively in support during the war, signaling a shift from being mere suppliers to active partners.

  • The relationship dynamics were still fraught with underlying inequalities, with Latin American nations often bound by economic dependency.

• Post-War Challenges:

  • Despite sacrifices in WWII, many Latin American countries faced the continued challenge of economic debts and dependency on U.S. support.

Conclusion

• The interactions between the U.S. and Latin America throughout the 20th century showcase a complex network of influence characterized by moral rhetoric intertwined with economic domination. U.S. actions were framed as benevolent, yet often led to a further entrenchment of dependency and neo-colonialism under the guise of democracy and progress.

• The ideological transformation from direct conquest to soft power diplomacy marks a key theme in understanding the historical and contemporary dynamics of U.S.-Latin American relations, revealing a persistent struggle for autonomy amidst influences of economic and cultural power.