text:
Latin America–United States relations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 190.140.135.197 (talk) at 08:14, 25 August 2017 (→Binational relationships). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 08:14, 25 August 2017 by 190.140.135.197 (talk) (→Binational relationships)
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: Article needs restructuring and fixing of continuous grammar/spelling issues. Please help improve this article if you can. (April 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Map of the United States of America
Map of Latin America
Until the end of the nineteenth century, the United States had a special relationship primarily with nearby Mexico and Cuba. Otherwise, relationships with other Latin American countries were of minor importance to both sides, consisting mostly of a small amount of trade. Apart from Mexico, there was little migration to the United States, and little American financial investment. Politically and economically, Latin America (apart from Mexico and the Spanish colony of Cuba) was largely tied to Britain. The United States had no involvement in the process by which Spanish possessions broke away and became independent around 1820. In cooperation with and help from Britain, the United States issued the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, warning against the establishment of any additional European colonies in Latin America.
Texas, which had been settled by colonies of Americans, fought a successful war of independence against Mexico in 1836. Mexico refused to recognize the independence and warned that annexation to the United States meant war. Annexation came in 1845 and war in 1846. The American military was easily triumphant. The result was the Mexican Cession of Santa Fe de Nuevo México and Alta California. About 60,000 Mexicans remained in the territories and became US citizens. France took advantage of the American Civil War (1861–65), using its army to take over Mexico. Due to defeats in Europe, France pulled out troops, leaving the Imperialists and Maximilian I of Mexico to face defeat from the Benito Juarez-led Republicans (backed by the US).
The Anglo-Venezuelan boundary dispute of Guayana Esequiba in 1895 asserted for the first time a more outward-looking American foreign policy, particularly in the Americas, marking the United States as a world power. This was the earliest example of modern interventionism under the Monroe Doctrine in which the USA exercised its claimed prerogatives in the Americas. By the late nineteenth century the rapid economic growth of the United States increasingly troubled Latin America. A Pan-American Union was created under American aegis, but it had little impact as did its successor the Organization of American States.
As unrest in Cuba escalated in the 1890s the United States demanded reforms that Spain was unable to accomplish. The result was the short Spanish–American War of 1898, in which United States acquired Puerto Rico, and set up a protectorate over Cuba under the Platt Amendment rule passed as part of the 1901 Army Appropriations Bill. The building of the Panama Canal absorbed American attention from 1903. The US facilitated a revolt that made Panama independent, and set up the Panama Canal Zone as an American owned and operated district that was finally returned to Panama in 1979. The Canal opened in 1914, and proved a major factor in world trade. United States paid special attention to protection of the military approaches to the Panama Canal, including threats by Germany. Repeatedly it seized temporary control of several countries, especially Haiti and Nicaragua.
The Mexican Revolution started in 1911; it alarmed American business interests that had invested in Mexican mines and railways. United States involvement in the Mexican Revolution, include, among other violations of sovereignty, the ambassadorial backing of a coup and assassination of President Francisco I. Madero and the military occupation of Veracruz. Large numbers of Mexicans fled the war-torn revolution into the southwestern United States. Meanwhile. the United States increasingly replaced Britain as the major trade partner and financier throughout Latin America. The US adopted a “Good Neighbor Policy" in the 1930s, which meant friendly trade relations would continue regardless of political conditions or dictatorships. United States signed up the major countries as allies against Germany and Japan in World War II. However, Argentina refused to accede. The era of the Good Neighbor Policy ended with the ramp-up of the Cold War in 1945, as the United States felt there was a greater need to protect the western hemisphere from Soviet Union influence and a potential rise of communism. These changes conflicted with the Good Neighbor Policy's fundamental principle of non-intervention and led to a new wave of US involvement in Latin American affairs.
The turn of Castro's revolution in Cuba after 1959 toward Soviet communism alienated Cuba from the United States. An attempted invasion failed, and at the peak of the Cold War in 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis threatened major war as the Soviet Union installed nuclear weapons in Cuba to defend it from an American invasion. There was no invasion, but the United States imposed an economic boycott on Cuba that remains in effect, as well as a break of diplomatic relations that lasted until 2015. The US also saw the rise of left-wing governments in central America as a threat, and in some cases, overthrew democratically elected governments perceived at the time as becoming left-wing or unfriendly to U.S. interests.[1] Examples include the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état, the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état, the 1973 Chilean coup d'état and the support of the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. After 1960, Latin America increasingly supplied illegal drugs, especially marijuana and cocaine to the rich American market. One consequence was the growth of extremely violent drug gangs in Mexico and other parts of Central America to control the drug supply. In the 1970s and 80s, the United States gave strong support to violent anti-Communist forces in Latin America.[2] The fall of Soviet communism in 1989–92 largely ended the communist threat. NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) took effect in 1994, and dramatically increased the volume of trade among Mexico, the United States and Canada. By 2015 relations remain tense between United States and Venezuela. Large-scale immigration from Latin America to the United States grew since the late twentieth century. Today approximately 18% of the U.S. population are Hispanic and Latino Americans. Furthermore over 10 million illegal immigrants live in the United States most of them with Hispanic origins. Many send money back home to family members and contribute considerably to the domestic economies of their countries of origin. Large-scale immigration to the United States came primarily from Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Cuba. Smaller - though still significant - immigrant populations from El Salvador, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala and Colombia exist in the United States.
Contents
[hide]
1 19th century to World War I
1.1 Venezuelan Independence
1.2 Chilean independence
1.3 Monroe Doctrine
1.4 The Anderson–Gual Treaty
1.5 The Anfictionic Congress of Panama
1.6 Mexican - American war (April, 1846-February 1848)
1.7 The Ostend Manifesto
1.8 The War of the Pacific (1879-1883)
1.9 The Big Brother policy
1.10 Venezuelan crisis of 1895
1.11 The Spanish–American War (1898)
1.12 Venezuelan crisis of 1902–1903
1.13 The Platt Amendment
1.14 The Panama Canal
1.15 The Roosevelt Corollary and Venezuelan Economic Issues
1.16 The Dollar Diplomacy
1.17 The Mexican Revolution, 1910-1920
1.18 Banana Wars
2 1930s–1940s
3 Expulsion of Germans from Latin America to the U.S. during World War II
4 1940s–1960s: the Cold War and the "hemispheric defense" doctrine
5 1960s: the Cuban Revolution and the U.S. response
6 1970s
7 1980s–1990s: democratization and the Washington Consensus
8 2000s: Pink Tide
8.1 Free trade and others regional integration
8.2 Bilateral investment treaties
8.3 The ALBA
8.4 The U.S. military coalition in Iraq
8.5 Bolivia's nationalization of natural resources
9 Academic research
10 See also
10.1 Binational relationships
11 Notes
12 References
13 Further reading
14 External links
19th century to World War I
Venezuelan Independence
Following the events of the Revolution of April 19, 1810, the Captain General Vicente Emparan - designated by Joseph Bonaparte to govern the Captaincy General of Venezuela - were deposed by an expanded municipal government in Caracas that called itself the Supreme Junta to Preserve the Rights of Ferdinand VII (La Suprema Junta Conservadora de los Derechos de Fernando VII). One of the first acts of the Junta was to send a diplomatic mission to the United States to seek the recognition of the Supreme Junta of Caracas as the legitimate government of Venezuela in the absence of the King. Juan Vicente Bolívar Palacios, Jose Rafael Revenga and Telesforo Orea managed to attract the interest of the government of President James Madison to support the Supreme Junta.
Chilean independence
In 1811, the arrival of Joel Roberts Poinsett in Santiago de Chile marked the beginning of U.S. involvement in Chilean politics. He had been sent by President James Madison in 1809 as a special agent to the South American Spanish colonies to investigate the prospects of the revolutionaries in their struggle for independence from Spain.
Monroe Doctrine
Main article: Monroe Doctrine
The 1823 Monroe Doctrine, which began the United States' policy of isolationism, deemed it necessary for the United States to refrain from entering into European affairs but to protect nations in the Western hemisphere from foreign military intervention. In cooperation with The United Kingdom, The United States issued the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, warning against the establishment of any additional European colonies in Latin America.
Despite this, European interventions continued to occur in American countries with the tacit or explicit support of the United States. These interventions include the occupation of the Falkland Islands by Britain in 1833, the French naval blockade of Argentine ports between 1839 and 1840, the Anglo-French blockade of the River Plate from 1845 to 1850, the Spanish invasion of the Dominican Republic between 1861 and 1865, the French intervention in Mexico between 1862 and 1865, the British occupation of the Mosquito coast in Nicaragua and the occupation of the Guayana Essequiba in Venezuela by Great Britain in 1855.
The Anderson–Gual Treaty
The Anderson–Gual Treaty (formally, the General Convention of Peace, Amity, Navigation, and Commerce) was an 1824 treaty between the United States and Gran Colombia (now the modern day countries of Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador). It was the first bilateral treaty concluded by the United States with another American country.
The treaty was signed in Santafe de Bogotá on 3 October 1824 by U.S. diplomat Richard Clough Anderson and by Venezuelan minister Pedro Gual Escandón. It was ratified by both countries and entered into force in May 1825.
The commercial provisions of the treaty granted reciprocal most-favored-nation status, and were maintained despite the dissolution of Gran Colombia in 1830. The treaty contained a clause that stated it would be in force for 12 years after ratification by both parties; the treaty therefore expired in 1837.
The Anfictionic Congress of Panama
The notion of an international union in the New World was first put forward by the Venezuelan Liberator Simón Bolívar[3] who, at the 1826 Congress of Panama (still being part of Gran Colombia), proposed a league of all American republics, with a common military, a mutual defense pact, and a supranational parliamentary assembly. Bolívar's dream of Latin American unity was meant to unify Hispanic American nations against external powers, including the United States. The meeting was attended by representatives of Gran Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, the United Provinces of Central America, and Mexico, but the grandly titled "Treaty of Union, League, and Perpetual Confederation" was ultimately ratified only by Gran Colombia. The United States' delegates to the Congress were delayed by internal politics in the United States. Though delegates were eventually dispatched by President John Quincy Adams, one (Richard Clough Anderson) died en route to Panama, and the other (John Sergeant) arrived after the Congress had concluded. Thus Great Britain, which attended with only observer status, managed to negotiate many trade deals with Latin American countries. Bolívar's dream soon foundered, with civil war in Gran Colombia, the disintegration of Central America, and the emergence of national rather than New World outlooks in the newly independent American republics.
Mexican - American war (April, 1846-February 1848)
Texas, settled primarily by Americans, fought a successful war of independence against Mexico in 1836. Mexico refused to recognize the independence and warned that annexation to the United States meant war. Annexation came in 1845; war came in 1846. The American military was easily triumphant. The result was the American purchase of New Mexico, Arizona, California and adjacent areas. About 60,000 Mexicans remained in the new territories and became US citizens. In 1862, French forces under Napoleon III invaded and conquered Mexico, giving control to the puppet monarch Emperor Maximilian I. Washington denounced this as a violation of the Monroe doctrine but was unable to intervene because of the American Civil War. In 1865 the United States stationed a large combat army on the border to emphasize its demand that France leave. France did pull out, and Mexican nationalists executed Maximilian.[4]
The Ostend Manifesto
The Ostend Manifesto of 1854 was a proposal circulated by American diplomats that proposed the United States offer to purchase Cuba from Spain while implying that the U.S. should declare war if Spain refused. Nothing came of it. Diplomatically, the US was content to see the island remain in Spanish hands so long as it did not pass to a stronger power such as Britain or France.
The War of the Pacific (1879-1883)
Main article: War of the Pacific
The United States tried to bring an early end to the War of the Pacific in 1879, mainly because of US business interests in Peru, but also because its leaders worried that the United Kingdom would take economic control of the region through Chile.[5] Peace negotiations failed when a stipulation required Chile to return the conquered lands. Chileans suspected the new US initiative was tainted with a pro-Peruvian bias. As a result, relations between Chile and the United States took a turn for the worse.[6] Chile instead asked that the United States remain neutral, and the United States, unable to match Chilean naval power, backed down.[7]
The Big Brother policy
US Secretary of State James G. Blaine created the Big Brother policy in the 1880s, aiming to rally Latin American nations behind US leadership and to open Latin American markets to U.S. traders. Blaine served as United States Secretary of State in 1881 in the cabinet of President James Garfield and again from 1889 to 1892 in the cabinet of President Benjamin Harrison. As part of the policy, Blaine arranged for and lead as the first president the First International Conference of American States in 1889.
Venezuelan crisis of 1895
President Cleveland twist the tail of the British Lion; cartoon in Puck by J.S. Pughe, 1895
Map showing:
* The extreme border claimed by Britain
* The current boundary (roughly) and
* The extreme border claimed by Venezuela
The Venezuelan crisis of 1895[a] occurred over Venezuela's longstanding dispute with the United Kingdom about the territory of Essequibo and Guayana Esequiba, which Britain claimed as part of British Guiana and Venezuela saw as Venezuelan territory. As the dispute became a crisis, the key issue became Britain's refusal to include in the proposed international arbitration the territory east of the "Schomburgk Line", which a surveyor had drawn half a century earlier as a boundary between Venezuela and the former Dutch territory of British Guiana.[8] By 17 December 1895, President Grover Cleveland delivered an address to the United States Congress reaffirming the Monroe Doctrine and its relevance to the dispute. The crisis ultimately saw the Brtitain prime minister Lord Salisbury accept the United States' intervention to force arbitration of the entire disputed territory, and tacitly accept the United States' right to intervene under the Monroe Doctrine. A tribunal convened in Paris in 1898 to decide the matter, and in 1899 awarded the bulk of the disputed territory to British Guiana.[9] The Anglo-Venezuelan boundary dispute asserted for the first time a more outward-looking American foreign policy, particularly in the Americas, marking the United States as a world power. This was the earliest example of modern interventionism under the Monroe Doctrine in which the USA exercised its claimed prerogatives in the Americas.[10]
The Spanish–American War (1898)
The Spanish–American War was a conflict fought between Spain and the United States in 1898. Hostilities began in the aftermath of sinking of the USS Maine in Havana harbor leading to American intervention in the Cuban War of Independence. The sinking of the USS Maine occurred on February 15, resulting in the deaths of 266 people, and causing the United States to blame Spain since the ship had been sent to Havana in order to protect a community of U.S. citizens there.[11] American acquisition of Spain's Pacific possessions led to its involvement in the Philippine Revolution and ultimately in the Philippine–American War.
Revolts against Spanish rule had been occurring for some years in Cuba as in the Virginius Affair in 1873. In the late 1890s, US public opinion was agitated by anti-Spanish propaganda led by journalists such as Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst which used yellow journalism to call for war. However, the Hearst and Pulitzer papers circulated among the working class in New York City and did not reach a national audience.[12][13]
After the mysterious sinking of the US Navy battleship Maine in Havana harbor, political pressures from the Democratic Party pushed the administration of Republican President William McKinley into a war he had wished to avoid.[14] Spain promised time and again it would reform but never delivered. The United States sent an ultimatum to Spain demanding it surrender control of Cuba. First Madrid, then Washington, formally declared war.[15]
Although the main issue was Cuban independence, the ten-week war was fought in both the Caribbean and the Pacific. US naval power proved decisive, allowing expeditionary forces to disembark in Cuba against a Spanish garrison already facing nationwide Cuban insurgent attacks and further wasted by yellow fever.[16] Numerically superior Cuban, Philippine, and US forces obtained the surrender of Santiago de Cuba and Manila despite the good performance of some Spanish infantry units and fierce fighting for positions such as San Juan Hill.[17] With two obsolete Spanish squadrons sunk in Santiago de Cuba and Manila Bay and a third, more modern fleet recalled home to protect the Spanish coasts, Madrid sued for peace.[18]
The result was the 1898 Treaty of Paris, negotiated on terms favorable to the US, which allowed it temporary control of Cuba, and ceded ownership of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippine islands. The cession of the Philippines involved payment of $20 million ($575,760,000 today) to Spain by the US to cover infrastructure owned by Spain.[19]
The war began exactly fifty-two years after the beginning of the Mexican–American War. It was one of only five US wars (against a total of eleven sovereign states) to have been formally declared by Congress.[20]
Venezuelan crisis of 1902–1903
A map of Middle America, showing the places affected by U.S. interventions[21]
The Venezuelan crisis of 1902–03 was a naval blockade from December 1902 to February 1903 imposed against Venezuela by Britain, Germany and Italy over President Cipriano Castro's refusal to pay foreign debts and damages suffered by European citizens in the recent Venezuelan civil war. Castro assumed that the United States' Monroe Doctrine would see the US prevent European military intervention, but at the time the president Roosevelt saw the Doctrine as concerning European seizure of territory, rather than intervention per se. With prior promises that no such seizure would occur, the US allowed the action to go ahead without objection. The blockade saw Venezuela's small navy quickly disabled, but Castro refused to give in, and instead agreed in principle to submit some of the claims to international arbitration, which he had previously rejected. Germany initially objected to this, particularly as it felt some claims should be accepted by Venezuela without arbitration.
U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt forced the blockading nations to back down by sending his own larger fleet under Admiral George Dewey and threatening war if the Germans landed.[22] With Castro failing to back down, US pressure and increasingly negative British and American press reaction to the affair, the blockading nations agreed to a compromise, but maintained the blockade during negotiations in over the details. This led to the signing of the Washington Protocols agreement on 13 February 1903 which saw the blockade lifted, and Venezuela commit 30% of its customs duties to settling claims. When the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague subsequently awarded preferential treatment to the blockading powers against the claims of other nations, the US feared this would encourage future European intervention. This incident was a major driver of the Roosevelt Corollary and the subsequent U.S. Big Stick policy and Dollar Diplomacy in Latin America.
The Platt Amendment
On March 2, 1901, the Platt Amendment was passed as part of the 1901 Army Appropriations Bill.[23] It stipulated seven conditions for the withdrawal of United States troops remaining in Cuba at the end of the Spanish–American War, and an eighth condition that Cuba sign a treaty accepting these seven conditions. It defined the terms of Cuban–U.S. relations to essentially be an unequal one of U.S. dominance over Cuba. On December 25, 1901, Cuba amended its constitution to contain the text of the Platt Amendment.[24] On May 22, 1903, Cuba entered into a treaty with the United States to allow the United States to intervene unilaterally in Cuban affairs, and a pledge to lease land to the United States for naval bases on the island as Guantanamo.
The Panama Canal
Further information: History of the Panama Canal
Theodore Roosevelt, who became President of the United States in 1901, believed that a U.S.-controlled canal across Central America was a vital strategic interest to the United States. This idea gained wide impetus following the destruction of the battleship USS Maine, in Cuba, on February 15, 1898.[citation needed] The USS Oregon, a battleship stationed in San Francisco, was dispatched to take her place, but the voyage—around Cape Horn—took 67 days. Although she was in time to join in the Battle of Santiago Bay, the voyage would have taken just three weeks via Panama.
Roosevelt was able to reverse a previous decision by the Walker Commission in favour of a Nicaragua Canal, and pushed through the acquisition of the French Panama Canal effort. Panama was then part of Colombia, so Roosevelt opened negotiations with the Colombians to obtain the necessary permission. In early 1903 the Hay–Herrán Treaty was signed by both nations, but the Colombian Senate failed to ratify the treaty.
In a controversial move, Roosevelt implied to Panamanian rebels that if they revolted, the U.S. Navy would assist their cause for independence. Panama proceeded to proclaim its independence on 3 November 1903, and the USS Nashville in local waters impeded any interference from Colombia.
The Panama Canal Zone—which was established on shaky legal grounds[25] and cut the country of Panama in half—led to incidents such as Martyrs' Day and the United States invasion of Panama.
The victorious Panamanians returned the favor to Roosevelt by allowing the United States control of the Panama Canal Zone on 23 February 1904, for US$10,000,000 (as provided in the Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty, signed on 18 November 1903).
The Roosevelt Corollary and Venezuelan Economic Issues
When the Venezuelan government under Cipriano Castro was no longer able to placate the demands of European bankers in 1902, naval forces from Britain, Italy, and Germany erected a blockade along the Venezuelan coast and even fired upon coastal fortifications. The U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt concern with the threat of penetration into the region by Germany and the increisingly negative British and American press reactions to the affair, the blockading nations agreed to a compromise, but maintained the blockade during negotiations, over the details of refinacial the debt on Washington Protocols.
The U.S. president then formulated the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, in December 1904, which asserted the right of the United States to intervene in Latin American nations' affairs.[26] In its altered state, the Monroe Doctrine would now consider Latin America as an agency for expanding U.S. commercial interests in the region, along with its original stated purpose of keeping European hegemony from the hemisphere. In addition, the corollary proclaimed the explicit right of the United States to intervene in Latin American conflicts exercising an international police power.
Roosevelt first used the Corollary to act in the Dominican Republic in 1904, which at the time was severely indebted and becoming a failed state.
The Dollar Diplomacy
From 1909 to 1913, President William Howard Taft and Secretary of State Philander C. Knox followed a foreign policy characterized as "dollar diplomacy." Taft shared the view held by Knox (a corporate lawyer who had founded the giant conglomerate U.S. Steel) that the goal of diplomacy should be to create stability abroad, and through this stability promote American commercial interests. Knox felt that not only was the goal of diplomacy to improve financial opportunities, but also to use private capital to further U.S. interests overseas. "Dollar diplomacy" was evident in extensive U.S. interventions in Cuba, Central America and Venezuela, especially in measures undertaken to safeguard American financial interests and from the United States government in the region. During the presidency of Juan Vicente Gómez Venezuela provided a very favorable atmosphere for USA activities at that time petroleum was discovered under Lake Maracaibo basin in 1914. Gómez managed to deflate Venezuela's staggering debt by granting concessions to foreign oil companies, which won him the support of the United States and the European powers. The growth of the domestic oil industry strengthened the economic ties between the U.S. and Venezuela.[27] In spite of successes, "dollar diplomacy" failed to counteract economic instability and the tide of revolution in places like Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and China.
The Mexican Revolution, 1910-1920
Main article: United States involvement in the Mexican Revolution
The United States appears to have pursued an inconsistent policy toward Mexico during the Mexican Revolution, but in fact it was the pattern for U.S. diplomacy. "Every victorious faction between 1910 and 1919 enjoyed the sympathy, and in most cases the direct support of U.S. authorities in its struggle for power. In each case, the administration in Washington soon turned on its new friends with the same vehemence it had initially expressed in supporting them."[28] The U.S. turned against the regimes it helped install when they began pursuing policies counter to U.S. diplomatic and business interests.[29]
The U.S. sent troops to the border with Mexico when it became clear in March 1911 that the regime of Porfirio Díaz could not control revolutionary violence.[30] Díaz resigned, opening the way for free elections that brought Francisco I. Madero to the presidency in November 1911. The U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Henry Lane Wilson conspired with opposition forces to topple Madero's regime in February 1913, during what is known as the Ten Tragic Days.
The U.S. intervened in Mexico twice under the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson, the United States occupation of Veracruz by the Navy in 1914 and mounted a punitive operation in northern Mexico in the Pancho Villa Expedition, aimed at capturing the northern revolutionary who had attacked Columbus, New Mexico.
Banana Wars
Further information: Banana Wars
William Allen Rogers's 1904 cartoon recreates the Big Stick ideology as an episode in Gulliver's Travels
US Marines with the captured flag of Augusto César Sandino in Nicaragua in 1932.
At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the US carried on several military interventions under principles of Big Stick policy in what became known as the Banana Wars. The term arose from the connections between the interventions and the preservation of US commercial interests, starting with the United Fruit corporation, which had significant financial stakes in production of bananas, tobacco, sugar cane, and various other agricultural products throughout the Caribbean, Central America and the northern portions of South America. US citizens advocating imperialism in the pre–World War I era often argued that these conflicts helped central and South Americans by aiding in stability. Some imperialists argued that these limited interventions did not serve US interests sufficiently and argued for expanded actions in the region. Anti-imperialists argued that these actions were a first step down a slippery slope towards US colonialism in the region.
Some modern observers have argued that if World War I had not lessened American enthusiasm for international activity these interventions might have led to the formation of an expanded U.S. colonial empire, with Central American states either annexed into Statehood like Hawaii or becoming American territories, like the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam. This view is, however, heavily disputed, especially as, after a decrease in activity during and after World War I, the U.S. government intervened again in the 1920s while again stating that no colonial ambitions were held. The Banana Wars ended with the 1933 Good Neighbor Policy of President Franklin D. Roosevelt; no official American colonies had been created.
The countries involved in the Banana Wars include:
Cuba – Sometimes not counted among the banana wars, as the Platt Amendment granted the United States the right to militarily intervene on any occasion in which Cuba's independence was threatened
US Occupation of the Dominican Republic
Honduras
Haiti (see United States occupation of Haiti)
Nicaragua (see United States occupation of Nicaragua)
Colombian banana massacre
Panama
Though many other countries in the region may have been influenced or dominated by American banana or other companies, there is no history of U.S. military intervention during this period in those countries.
1930s–1940s
The Great Depression made overseas military expeditions too costly for the U.S. In January 1931 Henry Stimson, then Secretary of State, announced that all U.S. soldiers in Nicaragua would be withdrawn following the 1932 election in the country. The Good Neighbor policy was the foreign policy of the new administration of United States President Franklin Roosevelt toward the countries of Latin America.The United States wished to have good relations with its neighbors, especially at a time when conflicts were beginning to rise once again, and this policy was more or less intended to garner Latin American support. Giving up unpopular military intervention, the United States shifted to other methods to maintain its influence in Latin America: Pan-Americanism, support for strong local leaders, the training of national guards, economic and cultural penetration, Export-Import Bank loans, financial supervision, and political subversion. The Good Neighbor Policy meant that the United States would keep its eye on Latin America in a more peaceful tone. On 4 March 1933, Roosevelt 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."[31] This position was affirmed by Cordell Hull, Roosevelt's Secretary of State at a conference of American states in Montevideo in December 1933. Hull said: "No country has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another" (LaFeber, 376). This is apparent when in December of the same year Roosevelt again gave verbal evidence of a shift in U.S. policy in the region when he stated: "The definite policy of the United States from now on is one opposed to armed intervention."[32]
Expulsion of Germans from Latin America to the U.S. during World War II
Further information: World War II related internment and expulsion of Germans in the Americas
After the United States declared war on Germany, the Federal Bureau of Investigation drafted a list of Germans in fifteen Latin American countries it suspected of subversive activities and demanded their eviction to the U.S. for detention. In response, several countries expelled a total of 4,058 Germans to the U.S. Some 10% to 15% of them were Nazi party members, including some dozen recruiters for the Nazis' overseas arm and eight people suspected of espionage. Also among them were 81 Jewish Germans who had only recently fled persecution in Nazi Germany. The bulk were ordinary Germans, who were residents in these states for years or decades. Some were expelled because corrupt Latin American officials took the opportunity to seize their property, or ordinary Latin Americans were after the financial reward that U.S. intelligence paid informants. Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico did not participate in the U.S. expulsion program.[33]
1940s–1960s: the Cold War and the "hemispheric defense" doctrine
Further information: Cold War (1947–1953)
"Most Latin Americans have seen their neighbor to the north (the United States) growing richer; they have seen the elite elements in their own societies growing richer – but the man in the street or on the land in Latin America today still lives the hand-to-mouth existence of his great, great grandfather... They are less and less happy with situations in which, to cite one example, 40 percent of the land is owned by 1 percent of the people, and in which, typically, a very thin upper crust lives in grandeur while most others live in squalor."
— U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright, in a speech to Congress on United States policy in Latin America[34]
Officially started in 1947 with the Truman doctrine theorizing the "containment" policy, the Cold War had important consequences in Latin America, considered by the United States to be a full part of the Western Bloc, called "free world", in contrast with the Eastern Bloc, a division born with the end of World War II and the Yalta Conference held in February 1945. It "must be the policy of the United States", Truman declared, "to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures." Truman rallied to spend $400.000.000 to intervene in the Greek civil war, while the CIA (created by the National Security Act of 1947) intervention in this country was its first act of birth. By aiding Greece, Truman set a precedent for U.S. aid to regimes, no matter how repressive and corrupt, that requested help to fight communists.[35] Washington began to sign a series of defense treaties with countries all over the world, including the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 which created NATO, and the ANZUS in 1951 with Australia and New Zealand. Moscow response to NATO and to the Marshall Plan in Europe included the creation of the COMECON economic treaty and the Warsaw Pact defense alliance, gathering Eastern Europe countries which had fallen under its sphere of influence. After the Berlin Blockade by the Soviet Union, the Korean War (1950–53) was one of the first conflicts of the Cold War, while the US would succeeded France in the counter-revolutionary war against Viet-minh in Indochina.
In Latin America itself, the US defense treaty was the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (aka Rio Treaty or TIAR) of 1947, known as the "hemispheric defense" treaty. It was the formalization of the Act of Chapultepec, adopted at the Inter-American Conference on the Problems of War and Peace in 1945 in Mexico City. The US had maintained a hemispheric defense policy under the Monroe Doctrine, and during the 1930s had been alarmed by Axis overtures toward military cooperation with Latin American governments, in particular apparent strategic threats against the Panama Canal. During the war, Washington had been able to secure Allied support from all individual governments except Uruguay, which remained neutral, and wished to make those commitments permanent. With the exceptions of Trinidad and Tobago (1967), Belize (1981), and the Bahamas (1982), no countries that became independent after 1947 have joined the treaty.
In April 1948, the Organization of American States (OAS) was created, during the Ninth International Conference of American States held in Bogotá and led by U.S. Secretary of State George Marshall. Member states pledged to fight communism on the American continent. Twenty-one American countries signed the Charter of the Organization of American States on 30 April 1948.
Operation PBSUCCESS, which overthrew the democratically-elected President of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán in 1954, was to be one of the first in a long series of US interventions in Latin America during the Cold War. It immediately followed the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran (1953).
Also, the Inter-American Development Bank was established in 1959.
1960s: the Cuban Revolution and the U.S. response
"The slogan 'we will not allow another Cuba' hides the possibility of perpetrating aggressions without fear of reprisal, such as the one carried out against the Dominican Republic or before that the massacre in Panama – and the clear warning stating that Yankee troops are ready to intervene anywhere in America where the ruling regime may be altered, thus endangering their interests."
— Che Guevara, April 16, 1967[36]
The 1959 Cuban Revolution, headed by Fidel Castro, was one of the first defeats of the US foreign policy in Latin America. In 1961, Cuba became a member of the newly created Non-Aligned Movement, which succeeded the 1955 Bandung Conference. After the implementation of several economic reforms, including complete nationalizations, by Cuba's government, US trade restrictions on Cuba increased. The U.S. halted Cuban sugar imports, on which Cuba's economy depended the most, and refused to supply its former trading partner with much needed oil, creating a devastating effect on the island's economy. In March 1960, tensions increased when the freighter La Coubre exploded in Havana harbor, killing over 75 people. Fidel Castro blamed the United States and compared the incident to the 1898 sinking of the USS Maine, which had precipitated the Spanish–American War, though admitting he could provide no evidence for his accusation.[37] That same month, President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized the CIA to organize, train, and equip Cuban refugees as a guerrilla force to overthrow Castro, which would lead to the failed 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion authorized by president John F. Kennedy.[38][39]
Every time the Cuban government nationalized US properties, the US government took countermeasures, resulting in the prohibition of all exports to Cuba on 19 October 1960. Consequently, Cuba began to consolidate trade relations with the Soviet Union, leading the US to break off all remaining official diplomatic relations. Later that year, U.S. diplomats Edwin L. Sweet and Wiliam G. Friedman were arrested and expelled from the island having been charged with "encouraging terrorist acts, granting asylum, financing subversive publications and smuggling weapons". The U.S. began the formulation of new plans aimed at destabilizing the Cuban government, collectively known as "The Cuban Project" (aka Operation Mongoose). This was to be a co-ordinated program of political, psychological and military sabotage, involving intelligence operations as well as assassination attempts on key political leaders. The Cuban project also proposed false flag attacks, known as Operation Northwoods. A U.S. Senate Select Intelligence Committee report later confirmed over eight attempted plots to kill Castro between 1960 and 1965, as well as additional plans against other Cuban leaders.[40]
“ We (the U.S.) have not only supported a dictatorship in Cuba – we have propped up dictators in Venezuela, Argentina, Colombia, Paraguay and the Dominican Republic. We not only ignored poverty and distress in Cuba – we have failed in the past eight years to relieve poverty and distress throughout the hemisphere. ”
— President John F. Kennedy, October 6, 1960[41]
Beside this aggressive policy towards Cuba, John F. Kennedy tried to implement the Alliance for Progress, an economic aid program which proved to be too shy signed at an inter-American conference at Punta del Este, Uruguay, in August 1961.
Romulo Betancourt's inaugural address in 1959
In Venezuela president Rómulo Betancourt faced determined opposition from extremists and rebellious army units, yet he continued to push for economic and educational reform. A fraction split from the government party AD and formed the Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR). When leftists were involved in unsuccessful revolts at navy bases (El Barcelonazo, El Carupanazo, El Porteñazo), Betancourt suspended civil liberties in 1962. Elements of the left parties then formed the Armed Forces for National Liberation (FALN), a communist guerrilla army to overthrown Betancourt democratic regime. This drove the leftists underground, where they engaged in rural and urban guerrilla activities, including sabotaging oil pipelines, bombing a Sears Roebuck warehouse, kidnapping American Colonel Michael Smolen, seized soccer star Alfredo Di Stefano, and bombing the United States Embassy in Caracas. FALN failed to rally the rural poor and to disrupt the December 1963 presidentials elections
After numerous attacks, he finally arrested the MIR and Communist Party of Venezuela (PCV) members of Congress. It became clear that a Fidel Castro had been arming the rebels, so Venezuela protested to the Organization of American States (OAS). In the same time, the U.S. suspended economic and/or broke off diplomatic relations with several dictatorships between 1961 and JFK's assassination in 1963, including Argentina, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Peru. But these suspensions were imposed only temporarily, for periods of only three weeks to six months. However, the US finally decided it best to train Latin American militaries in counter-insurgency tactics at the School of the Americas. In effect, the Alliance for Progress included U.S. programs of military and police assistance to counter Communism, including Plan LAZO in Colombia from 1959 to 1964.
The nuclear arms race brought the two superpowers to the brink of nuclear war. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy responded to the installation of nuclear missiles in Cuba with a naval blockade—a show of force that brought the world close to nuclear war.[42] The Cuban Missile Crisis showed that neither superpower was ready to use nuclear weapons for fear of the other's retaliation, and thus of mutually assured destruction. The aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis led to the first efforts at nuclear disarmament and improving relations. (Palmowski)
By 1964, under President Johnson, the program to discriminate against dictatorial regimes ceased. In March 1964 the US supported a military coup in Brazil, overthrowing left-wing president João Goulart, and was prepared to help if called upon under Operation Brother Sam.[43] In 1965, the US dispatched 24,000 soldiers to the Dominican Republic to prevent a possible left-wing take over under Operation Power Pack. Earlier the OAS issued a resolution calling the combatants to end all hostilities. On 5 May, the OAS Peace Committee arrived in Santo Domingo, a second definite cease fire agreement was then signed ending the main phase of the civil war. Under the Act of Santo Domingo, OAS was tasked with overseeing the implementation of the peace deal as well as distributing food and medication through the capital. The treaties failed to fully prevent violations such as small scale firefights and sniper fire. A day later OAS members established the Inter-American Peace Force (IAPF) with the goal of serving as a peacekeeping formation in the Dominican Republic. IAPF consisted of 1,748 Brazilian, Paraguayan, Nicaraguan, Costa Rican, Salvadoran and Honduran troops and was headed by Brazilian general Hugo Panasco Alvim, with Bruce Palmer serving as his deputy commander.[44][45]
On 26 May, U.S. forces began gradually withdrawing from the island. The first post war elections were held on 1 July 1966, pitting Reformist Party candidate Joaquín Balaguer against former president Juan Emilio Bosch Gaviño. Balaguer emerged victorious in the elections, after building his campaign on promises of reconciliation. On 21 September 1966, the last OAS peacekeepers withdrew from the island, ending the foreign intervention in the conflict.[44][46]
Through the Office of Public Safety, an organization dependent of the USAID and close to the CIA, the US assisted Latin American security forces, training them in interrogation methods, riot control, and sending them equipment. Dan Mitrione, in Uruguay, and Luis Posada Carriles in Venezuela became infamous for his systematic use of torture.
1970s
Following the 1959 Cuban Revolution and the local implementation in several countries of Che Guevara's foco theory, the US waged a war in South America[citation needed] against what it called "Communist subversives", leading to support of coups against democratically elected presidents such as the backing of the Chilean right wing, which would culminate with Augusto Pinochet's 1973 Chilean coup against democratically-elected Salvador Allende. By 1976, all of South America was covered by similar military dictatorships, called juntas. In Paraguay, Alfredo Stroessner had been in power since 1954; in Brazil, left-wing President João Goulart was overthrown by a military coup in 1964 with the assistance of the US in what was known as Operation Brother Sam; in Bolivia, General Hugo Banzer overthrew leftist General Juan José Torres in 1971; in Uruguay, considered the "Switzerland" of South America, Juan María Bordaberry seized power in the 27 June 1973 coup. In Peru, leftist General Velasco Alvarado in power since 1968, planned to use the recently empowered Peruvian military to overwhelm Chilean armed forces in a planned invasion of Pinochetist Chile. A "Dirty War" was waged all over the subcontinent, culminating with Operation Condor, an agreement between security services of the Southern Cone and other South American countries to repress and assassinate political opponents, which was backed by the US government.[2] The armed forces also took power in Argentina in 1976,[47] and then supported the 1980 "Cocaine Coup" of Luis García Meza Tejada in Bolivia, before training the "Contras" in Nicaragua, where the Sandinista National Liberation Front, headed by Daniel Ortega, had taken power in 1979, as well as militaries in Guatemala and in El Salvador. In the frame of Operation Charly, supported by the US, the Argentine military exported state terror tactics to Central America, where the "dirty war" was waged until well into the 1990s, making hundreds of thousands "disappeared".
With the election of President Jimmy Carter in 1977, the US moderated for a short time its support to authoritarian regimes in Latin America. It was during that year that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, an agency of the OAS, was created. At the same time, voices in the US[who?] began to denounce Pinochet's violation of human rights, in particular after the 1976 assassination of former Chilean minister Orlando Letelier in Washington D.C.
1980s–1990s: democratization and the Washington Consensus
The inauguration of Ronald Reagan in 1981 meant a renewed support for right-wing authoritarian regimes in Latin America. In the 1980s, the situation progressively evolved in the world as in South America, despite a renewal of the Cold War from 1979 to 1985, the year during which Mikhail Gorbachev replaced Konstantin Chernenko as leader of the USSR, and began to implement the glasnost and the perestroika democratic-inspired reforms. South America saw various states returning progressively to democracy. This democratization of South America found a symbol in the OAS' adoption of Resolution 1080 in 1991, which requires the Secretary General to convene the Permanent Council within ten days of a coup d'état in any member country. However, at the same time, Washington started to aggressively pursue the "War on Drugs", which included the invasion of Panama in 1989 to overthrow Manuel Noriega, who had been a long-time ally of the US and had even worked for the CIA before his reign as leader of the country. The "War on Drugs" was later expanded through Plan Colombia in the late 1990s and the Mérida Initiative in Mexico and central america.
Gente's "Estamos ganando" headline ("We're winning")
Reagan's support of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher during the 1982 Malvinas/Falklands War against the military junta in Argentina had a key role in the change of relations between Washington and Buenos Aires, which had been actively helping Reagan when the Argentine intelligence service was training and arming the Nicaraguan Contras against the Sandinista government (Operation Charly). The 601 Intelligence Battalion, for example, trained Contras at Lepaterique base in Honduras, under the supervision of US ambassador John Negroponte. While the US were fighting against Nicaragua, leading to the 1986 Nicaragua v. United States case before the International Court of Justice, Washington, D.C. supported authoritarian regimes in Guatemala and Salvador. The support to General Ríos Montt during the Guatemalan Civil War and the alliance with José Napoleón Duarte during the Salvadoran Civil War were legitimized by the Reagan administration as full part of the Cold War, although other allies strongly criticized this assistance to dictatorships (i.e., the French Socialist Party's 110 Propositions).
In fact, many Latin American countries view the 1982 conflict as a clear example of how the so called Hemispheric relations works.[48] A deep weakening of hemispheric relations occurred due to the US support given, without mediation, to the United Kingdom during the Malvinas/Falklands war in 1982. Some argue this definitively turned the TIAR into a dead letter. In 2001, the United States invoked the Rio Treaty after the 11 September attacks, but Latin American democracies did not join the War on Terror. (Furthermore, Mexico withdrew from the treaty in 2001 citing the Falklands example.)
On the economic plane, hardly affected by the 1973 oil crisis, the refusal of Mexico in 1983 to pay the interest of its debt led to the Latin American debt crisis and subsequently to a shift from the Import substitution industrialization policies followed by most countries to export-oriented industrialization, which was encouraged by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the World Trade Organization (WTO). While globalization was making its effects felt in the whole world, the 1990s were dominated by the Washington Consensus, which imposed a series of neo-liberal economic reforms in Latin America. The First Summit of the Americas, held in Miami in 1994, resolved to establish a Free Trade Area of the Americas (ALCA, Área de Libre Comercio de las Américas) by 2005. The ALCA was supposed to be the generalization of the North American Free Trade Agreement between Canada, the US and Mexico, which came into force in 1994. Opposition to both NAFTA and ALCA was symbolized during this time by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation insurrection, headed by Subcomandante Marcos, which became active on the day that NAFTA went into force (1 January 1994) and declared itself to be in explicit opposition to the ideology of globalization or neoliberalism, which NAFTA symbolized.
2000s: Pink Tide
Chávez visiting the USS Yorktown, a US Navy ship docked at Curaçao in the Netherlands Antilles, in 2002
The political context evolved again in the 2000s, with the election in several South American countries of socialist governments.[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] This "pink tide" thus saw the successive elections of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela (1998), Lula in Brazil (2002), Néstor Kirchner in Argentina (2003), Tabaré Vázquez in Uruguay (2004), Evo Morales in Bolivia (2005) (re-elected with 64.22% of the vote in Bolivian general election, 2009), Michelle Bachelet in Chile (2006), Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua (2006), Rafael Correa in Ecuador (2007), Fernando Lugo in Paraguay (August 15, 2008), José Mujica in Uruguayan general election, 2009, Ollanta Humala in Peru (June 5, 2011) and most recently Luis Guillermo Solís in Costa Rica (2014). Although these leaders vary in their policies and attitude towards both Washington, D.C. and neoliberalism, while the states they govern also have different agendas and long-term historic tendencies, which can lead to rivalry and open contempt between themselves, they seem to have agreed on refusing the ALCA and on following a regional integration without the United States' overseeing the process.[58] In particular, Chávez and Morales seem more disposed to ally together, while Kirchner and Lula, who has been criticized by the left-wing in Brazil, including by the Movimento dos Sem Terra (MST) landless peasants movement (who, however, did call to vote for him on his second term[59][60]), are seen as more centered. The state of Bolivia also has seen some friction with Brazil, while Chile has historically followed its own policy, distinct from other South American countries and closer to the United States. Thus, Nouriel Roubini, professor of economics at New York University, declared in a May 2006 interview:
"On one side, you have a number of administrations that are committed to moderate economic reform. On the other, you've had something of a backlash against the Washington Consensus [a set of liberal economic policies that Washington-based institutions urged Latin American countries to follow, including privatization, trade liberalization and fiscal discipline] and some emergence of populist leaders"[61]
In the same way, although a leader such as Chávez verbally attacked the George W. Bush administration as much as the latter attacked him, and claimed to be following a democratic socialist Bolivarian Revolution, the geo-political context has changed a lot since the 1970s. Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, thus stated:
"La Paz has found itself at the economic and political nexus of the pink tide, linked by ideology to Caracas, but economically bound to Brasilia and Buenos Aires. One thing that Morales knew, however, was that he couldn’t repudiate his campaign pledges to the electorate or deprive Bolivia of the revenue that is so urgently needed.[58]
One sign of the US setback in the region has been the OEA 2005 Secretary General election. For the first time in the OEA's history, Washington's candidate was refused by the majority of countries, after two stalemates between José Miguel Insulza, member of the Socialist Party of Chile and former Interior Minister of the latter country, and Luis Ernesto Derbez, member of the conservative National Action Party (PAN) and former Foreign Minister of Mexico. Derbez was explicitly supported by the US, Canada, Mexico, Belize, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Bolivia (then presided by Carlos Mesa), Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua, while Chilean minister José Insulza was supported by all the Southern Cone countries, as well as Brazil, Ecuador, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. José Insulza was finally elected at the third turn, and took office on 26 May 2005
Free trade and others regional integration
While the Free Trade Area of the Americas (ALCA) was abandoned after the 2005 Mar del Plata Summit of the Americas, which saw protests against the venue of US President George W. Bush, including Argentine piqueteros, free trade agreements were not abandoned. Regional economic integration under the sign of neoliberalism continued: under the Bush administration, the United States, which had signed two free-trade agreements with Latin American countries, signed eight further agreements, reaching a total of ten such bilateral agreements (including the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement in 2003, the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement in 2006, etc.). Three others, including the Peru-United States Free Trade Agreement signed in 2006, are awaiting for ratification by the US Congress.[62]
The Cuzco Declaration, signed a few weeks before at the Third South American Summit, announced the foundation of the Union of South American Nations (Unasul-Unasur) grouping Mercosul countries and the Andean Community and which as the aim of eliminating tariffs for non-sensitive products by 2014 and sensitive products by 2019. On the other hand, the CAFTA-DR free-trade agreement (Dominican Republic–Central America Free Trade Agreement) was ratified by all countries except Costa Rica. The president of the latter country, Óscar Arias, member of the National Liberation Party and elected in February 2006, pronounced himself in favor of the agreement.[citation needed] Costa Rica then held a national referendum in which the population voted to approve CAFTA, which was then done by the parliament. Canada, which also has a free-trade agreement with Costa Rica, has also been negotiating such an agreement with Central American country, named Canada Central American Free Trade Agreement.
On the other hand, Chile, which has long followed a policy differing from that of its neighbors}, has signed the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (aka P4 free-trade agreement) with Brunei, New Zealand and Singapore. The P4 came into force in May 2006. All signatory countries are member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. The United States will be joining the group as well.[citation needed]
Bilateral investment treaties
Further information: Bilateral investment treaty
Apart from binational free-trade agreements, the US has also signed a number of bilateral investment treaties (BIT) with Latin American countries, establishing the conditions of foreign direct investment. These treaties include "fair and equitable treatment", protection from expropriation, free transfer of means and full protection and security. Critics point out that US negotiators can control the pace, content and direction of bilateral negotiations with individual countries more easily than they can with larger negotiating frameworks.[63]
In case of a disagreement between a multinational firm and a state over some kind of investment made in a Latin American country, the firm may depose a lawsuit before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (International Center for the Resolution of Investment Disputes), which is an international court depending on the World Bank. Such a lawsuit was deposed by the US-based multinational firm Bechtel following its expulsion from Bolivia during the Cochabamba protests of 2000. Local population had demonstrated against the privatization of the water company, requested by the World Bank, after poor management of the water by Bechtel. Thereafter, Bechtel requested $50 millions from the Bolivian state in reparation. However, the firm finally decided to drop the case in 2006 after an international protest campaign.[64]
Such BIT were passed between the US and numerous countries (the given date is not of signature but of entrance in force of the treaty): Argentina (1994), Bolivia (2001), Ecuador (1997), Grenada (1989), Honduras (2001), Jamaica (1997), Panama (1991, amended in 2001), Trinidad and Tobago (1996). Others where signed but not ratified: El Salvador (1999), Haiti (1983 – one of the earliest, preceded by Panama), Nicaragua (1995).
The ALBA
Manuel Santos, Hillary Clinton, Sebastián Piñera and Hugo Chávez meeting on 1 January 2011, Brasília
Main article: Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas
In reply to the ALCA, Chavez initiated the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA). Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia signed the TCP (or People's Trade Agreement), while Venezuela, a main productor of natural gas and of petroleum (it is member of the OPEC) has signed treaties with Argentina, Brazil and Nicaragua, where Daniel Ortega, former leader of the Sandinistas, was elected in 2006 – Ortega, however, cut down his anti-imperialist and socialist discourse, and is hotly controversial; both on the right-wing and on the left-wing. Chávez also implemented the Petrocaribe alliance, signed by 12 of the 15 members of the Caribbean Community in 2005. When Hurricane Katrina ravaged Florida and Louisiana, Chávez, who called the "Yanqui Empire" a "paper tiger", even ironically proposed to provide "oil-for-the-poor" to the US after Hurricane Katrina the same year, through Citgo, a subsidiary of PDVSA the state-owned Venezuelan petroleum company, which has 14,000 gas stations and owns eight oil refineries in the US.[65][66]
The U.S. military coalition in Iraq
In June 2003, some 1,200 troops from Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua joined forces along with Spaniard forces (1,300 troops) to form the Plus Ultra Brigade in Iraq. The Brigade was dissolved in April 2004 following the retirement of Spain from Iraq, and all Latin American nations, except El Salvador, withdrew their troops.
In September 2005, it was revealed that Triple Canopy, Inc., a private military company present in Iraq, was training Latin American mercenaries in Lepaterique in Honduras.[67] Lepaterique was a former training base for the Contras. 105 Chilean mercenaries were deported from the country. According to La Tribuna Honduran newspaper, in one day in November, Your Solutions shipped 108 Hondurans, 88 Chileans and 16 Nicaraguans to Iraq.[68] Approximatively 700 Peruvians, 250 Chileans and 320 Hondurans work in Baghdad's Green Zone for Triple Canopy, paid half price in comparison to North-American employees. The news also attracted attention in Chile, when it became known that retired military Marina Óscar Aspe worked for Triple Canopy. The latter had taken part to the assassination of Marcelo Barrios Andrade, a 21-year-old member of the FPMR, who is on the list of victims of the Rettig Report – while Marina Óscar Aspe is on the list of the 2001 Comisión Ética contra la Tortura (2001 Ethical Commission Against Torture). Triple Canopy also has a subsidiary in Peru.[67]
In July 2007, Salvadoran president Antonio Saca reduced the number of deployed troops in Iraq from 380, to 280 soldiers. Four Salvadoran soldiers died in different situations since deployment in 2003, but on the bright side, more than 200 projects aimed to rebuild Iraq were completed.[69]
Bolivia's nationalization of natural resources
Further information: History of Bolivia
2003 Poster for a photo exhibition of the Bolivian Gas War, which lead to the resignation of US-supported[70] president Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada and the subsequent election of Evo Morales, first Aymara president of Bolivia and opponent of US-sponsored coca eradication programs.
The struggle for natural resources and the US defense of its commercial interests has not ceased since the zenith period of the banana republics supported by the US. The general context has changed significantly and each country's approach has evolved accordingly. Thus, the Bolivian Gas War in 2003–04 was sparked after projects by the Pacific LNG consortium to export natural gas – Bolivia possessing the second largest natural gas reserves in South America after Venezuela – to California (Baja California and US California) via Chile, resented in Bolivia since the War of the Pacific (1879–1884) which deprived it of an access to the Pacific Ocean. The ALCA was also opposed during the demonstrations, headed by the Bolivian Workers' Center and Felipe Quispe's Indigenous Pachakuti Movement (MIP).
A proof of the new geopolitical context can be seen in Evo Morales' announcement, in concordance with his electoral promises, of the nationalization of gas reserves, the second highest in South America after Venezuela. First of all, he carefully warned that they would not take the form of expropriations or confiscations, maybe fearing a violent response. The nationalizations, which, according to Vice President Álvaro García, are supposed to make the government's energy-related revenue jump to $780 million in the following year, expanding nearly sixfold from 2002,[71] led to criticisms from Brazil, which Petrobras company is one of the largest foreign investors in Bolivia, controlling 14 percent of the country's gas reserves.[72] Bolivia is one of the poorest countries in South America and was heavily affected by protests in the 1980s–90s, largely due to the shock therapy enforced by previous governments,[58] and also by resentment concerning the coca eradication program – coca is a traditional plant for the Native Quechua and Aymara people, who use it for therapeutical (against altitude sickness) and cultural purposes. Thus, Brazil's Energy Minister, Silas Rondeau, reacted to Morales' announcement by condemning the move as "unfriendly."[73] According to Reuters, "Bolivia's actions echo what Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, possibly Morales' biggest ally, did in the world's fifth-largest oil exporter with forced contract migrations and retroactive tax hikes – conditions that major oil companies largely agreed to accept." The Bolivian gas company YPFB, privatized by former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada, was to pay foreign companies for their services, offering about 50 percent of the value of production, although the decree indicated that companies exploiting the country's two largest gas fields would get just 18 percent. After initially hostile reactions, Repsol "expressed its willingness to cooperate with the Bolivian government," while Petrobras retreated its call to cancel new investment in Bolivia.[58] However, still according to Larry Birns, "The nationalization's high media profile could force the [US] State Department to take a tough approach to the region, even to the point of mobilizing the CIA and the U.S. military, but it is more likely to work its way by undermining the all-important chink in the armor – the Latin American armed forces."[58]
Academic research
There are two broad schools of thought on Latin America–United States relations:[74]
The "establishment" school which sees US policy towards Latin America as an attempt to exclude extraterritorial rivals from the hemisphere as a way to defend the United States. This grouping of scholars generally sees the US presence in Latin America as beneficial for the region, as it has made warfare rare, led to the creation of multilateral institutions in the region and promoted democracy.
The "revisionist synthesis" school of scholarship that emerged during the 1980s and 1990s and saw US policy towards Latin America as imperial. This grouping of scholars emphasizes the role of US business and government elites in shaping a foreign policy to economically dominate Latin America.
See also
American Empire
Foreign relations of the United States
List of United States military bases
List of free trade agreements
List of authoritarian regimes supported by the United States
Organization of American States
Anti Americanism
Binational relationships
Argentina–United States relations
Bolivia-United States relations
Brazil–United States relations
Chile–United States relations
Colombia–United States relations
Cuba–United States relations
Ecuador–United States relations
Mexico–United States relations
Nicaragua–United States relations
Panama–United States relations
United States–Venezuela relations
Notes
Jump up ^ Sometimes called the "first Venezuelan crisis", the crisis of 1902–03 being the second.
References
Jump up ^ "Latin America's Left Turn". foreignaffairs.org. Archived from the original on April 18, 2008. Retrieved March 23, 2008.
^ Jump up to: a b McSherry, J. Patrice (2011). "Chapter 5: "Industrial repression" and Operation Condor in Latin America". In Esparza, Marcia; Henry R. Huttenbach; Daniel Feierstein. State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years (Critical Terrorism Studies). Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 0415664578.
Jump up ^ "Panama: A Country Study". Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1987.
Jump up ^ M. M. McAllen, Maximilian and Carlota: Europe's Last Empire in Mexico (2014)
Jump up ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=y-7zk_kK9dgC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=James+G.+Blaine+Chile+England&source=bl&ots=1FAl8dgfGu&sig=oJk3NsGVWssa1sRqB9oeynDWC8Y&hl=en&ei=Rs5kSui-FYSksgO0-IRn&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1
Jump up ^ [1] page 70
Jump up ^ http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/war-of-the-pacific.htm
Jump up ^ King (2007:249)
Jump up ^ Graff, Henry F., Grover Cleveland (2002). ISBN 0-8050-6923-2. pp123-25
Jump up ^ Ferrell, Robert H. "Monroe Doctrine". ap.grolier.com. Archived from the original on March 21, 2008. Retrieved 2008-10-31.
Jump up ^ Hoganson, Kristin (2017). American Empire at the Turn of the Twentieth Century. Boston, MA: Bedford/St.Marin's. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-312-67705-3 – via Open edition.
Jump up ^ Mark Barnes (2010). The Spanish–American War and Philippine Insurrection, 1898–1902. Routledge. p. 67.
Jump up ^ W. Joseph Campbell, Yellow journalism: Puncturing the myths, defining the legacies (2001).
Jump up ^ Beede 1994, p. 148.
Jump up ^ Beede 1994, p. 120.
Jump up ^ Pérez 1998, p. 89 states: "In the larger view, the Cuban insurrection had already brought the Spanish army to the brink of defeat. During three years of relentless war, the Cubans had destroyed railroad lines, bridges, and roads and paralyzed telegraph communications, making it all but impossible for the Spanish army to move across the island and between provinces. [The] Cubans had, moreover, inflicted countless thousands of casualties on Spanish soldiers and effectively driven Spanish units into beleaguered defensive concentrations in the cities, there to suffer the further debilitating effects of illness and hunger."
Jump up ^ "Military Book Reviews". StrategyPage.com. Retrieved March 22, 2011.
Jump up ^ Dyal, Carpenter & Thomas 1996, pp. 108–109.
Jump up ^ Benjamin R. Beede (2013). The War of 1898 and U.S. Interventions, 1898T1934: An Encyclopedia. Taylor & Francis. p. 289.
Jump up ^ "U.S. Senate: Official Declarations of War by Congress". senate.gov. June 29, 2015.
Jump up ^ Bailey 1980, p. 500
Jump up ^ Edmund Morris, "'A Matter Of Extreme Urgency' Theodore Roosevelt, Wilhelm II, and the Venezuela Crisis of 1902," Naval War College Review (2002) 55#2 pp 73–85
Jump up ^ 1901 Platt Amendment commentary at the US Archives online
Jump up ^ US archives online, Date of ratification by Cuba
Jump up ^ Shoultz, Lars. Beneath the United States pg. 166–169. The U.S. violated Colombian sovereignty in that they supported the secession of Panama through the use of the U.S. navy. Senator Edward Carmack was quoted as saying, "There never was any real insurrection in Panama. To all intents and purposes [sic] there was but one man in that insurrection, and that man was the President of the United States."
Jump up ^ Glickman, Robert Jay. Norteamérica vis-à-vis Hispanoamérica: ¿oposición o asociación? Toronto: Canadian Academy of the Arts, 2005.
Jump up ^ http://www.adst.org/Readers/Venezuela.pdf
Jump up ^ Friedrich Katz, The Secret War in Mexico: Europe, the United States, and the Mexican Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1981, p. 563.
Jump up ^ Katz, Secret War in Mexico, p. 564.
Jump up ^ John Womack, Jr. "The Mexican Revolution" in Mexico Since Independence, ed. Leslie Bethell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1991, p. 131.
Jump up ^ Roosevelt, Franklin Delano. "First Inaugural Address." Washington, D.C. March 4, 1933
Jump up ^ Edgar B. Nixon, ed. Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs: Volume I, 559–60.
Jump up ^ Adam, Thomas, ed. (2005). Transatlantic relations series. Germany and the Americas: Culture, Politics, and History : a Multidisciplinary Encyclopedia. II. ABC-CLIO. pp. 181–2. ISBN 1-85109-628-0.
Jump up ^ Inter-American economic affairs Volumes 15–16, by Institute of Inter-American Studies in Washington, D.C., Inter-American Affairs Press, 1975
Jump up ^ LaFeber, Walter. America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945–1992 7th ed. (1993)
Jump up ^ Latin America and the United States: A Documentary History, by Robert H. Holden & Eric Zolov, Oxford University Press, 2000, ISBN 0-19-512994-6
Jump up ^ Fursenko and Naftali, The Cuban Missile Crisis. p40–47
Jump up ^ Bay of Pigs Global Security.org
Jump up ^ "Castro marks Bay of Pigs victory" BBC News
Jump up ^ Interim Report: Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders Original document
Jump up ^ "Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy at Democratic Dinner, Cincinnati, Ohio, October 6, 1960"[permanent dead link] from the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library
Jump up ^ "Cold War", Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Craig Calhoun, ed. Oxford University Press. 2002.
Jump up ^ Bell, P. M. H. (2001). The World Since 1945. Oxford University Press. 0340662360.
^ Jump up to: a b Cite error: The named reference NukEm was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Jump up ^ Cite error: The named reference SFaq was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Jump up ^ Cite error: The named reference JiHx was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Jump up ^ According to the National Security Archive, the Argentine junta led by Jorge Rafael Videla, believed it had United States' approval for its all-out assault on the left in the name of "national security doctrine". The U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires complained to Washington that the Argentine officers were "euphoric" over signals from high-ranking U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. See ARGENTINE MILITARY BELIEVED U.S. GAVE GO-AHEAD FOR DIRTY WAR, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 73 – Part II, CIA classified documents released in 2002
Jump up ^ "Revista Fuerzas Armadas y Sociedad – The Brazilian foreign policy and the hemispheric security". Socialsciences.scielo.org. Retrieved 12 December 2011.
Jump up ^ "Correa highligts new socialism in Latin America". Cre.com.ec. Archived from the original on October 2, 2011. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Sao Paulo Journal; Lula's Progress: From Peasant Boy to President?". New York Times. December 27, 1993. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Venezuela championing a new socialist agenda". Findarticles.com. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Argentina's Néstor Kirchner: Peronism Without the Tears". Coha.org. January 27, 2006. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ Socialist takes oath as Uruguay president Archived January 4, 2016, at the Wayback Machine.
Jump up ^ Neo-liberalism and the New Socialism – speech by Alvaro Garcia Linera (Vicepresident of Bolivia)[dead link]
Jump up ^ Rohter, Larry (March 11, 2006). "Chile's Socialist President Exits Enjoying Wide Respect". The New York Times. Chile. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Daniel Ortega – the Sandinista is back as president of Nicaragua". Internationalanalyst.wordpress.com. June 13, 2007. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Paraguay's new president believes in God and 21st-Century Socialism". En.rian.ru. April 23, 2008. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e The Aftermath of Bolivia’s Gas Golpe Archived December 10, 2006, at the Wayback Machine., Larry Birns and Michael Lettieri, Political Affairs magazine, July 5, 2006
Jump up ^ Interview with Geraldo Fontes of the MST, In Motion magazine, March 26, 2005
Jump up ^ MST calls for Congress-Brazilian people alliance, Radiobras, June 23, 2005
Jump up ^ Bolivia's Nationalization of Oil and Gas, US Council on Foreign Relations, May 12, 2006
Jump up ^ Le Figaro, March 8, 2007, George Bush défie Hugo Chavez sur son terran (in French)
Jump up ^ "Latin America: Bilateral Trade Deals Favor U.S. Interests". Stratfor.com. November 12, 2002. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
Jump up ^ Bechtel vs Bolivia Archived July 5, 2008, at the Wayback Machine., The Democracy Center, URL accessed on March 14, 2007
Jump up ^ Chavez offers oil to Europe's poor, The Observer, May 14, 2006
Jump up ^ Chavez' Surprise for Bush Archived November 22, 2006, at the Wayback Machine., New York Daily News, September 18, 2005, mirrored by Common Dreams
^ Jump up to: a b Capítulos desconocidos de los mercenarios chilenos en Honduras camino de Iraq, La Nación, September 25, 2005 – URL accessed on February 14, 2007 (in Spanish)
Jump up ^ Latin American mercenaries guarding Baghdad’s Green Zone, December 28, 2005
Jump up ^ (in Spanish) Contingente IX con menos soldados a Iraq, La Prensa Grafica, July 15, 2007
Jump up ^ The U.S. Department of State issued a statement on October 13 declaring its support for Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, calling for "Bolivia's political leaders [to] publicly express their support for democratic and constitutional order. The international community and the United States will not tolerate any interruption of constitutional order and will not support any regime that results from undemocratic means." This statement followed the death of 60 Bolivians during the police and army repression, in particular in El Alto, the Aymara suburb of La Paz "Call for Respect for Constitutional Order in Bolivia". US State Department. October 13, 2003. Archived from the original on March 6, 2008. Retrieved April 2006. Check date values in: |access-date= (help)
Jump up ^ "Bolivia's military takes control of gas fields". Reuters. May 2, 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-02. [permanent dead link]
Jump up ^ "Bolivia gas under state control". BBC News. May 2, 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-02.
Jump up ^ "Ministro de Minas e Energia classifica decreto boliviano de "inamistoso"" (in Portuguese). Folha de S.Paulo. May 2, 2006. Retrieved 2006-05-02.
Jump up ^ "Latin America Confronts the United States by Tom Long". Cambridge Core. Retrieved 2017-03-16.
Further reading
LaRosa, Michael J. and Frank O. Mora. Neighborly Adversaries: Readings in U.S.–Latin American Relations (2006)
Mellander, Gustavo A.; Nelly Maldonado Mellander (1999). Charles Edward Magoon: The Panama Years. Río Piedras, Puerto Rico: Editorial Plaza Mayor. ISBN 1-56328-155-4. OCLC 42970390.
Mellander, Gustavo A. (1971). The United States in Panamanian Politics: The Intriguing Formative Years. Danville, Ill.: Interstate Publishers. OCLC 138568.
When States Kill: Latin America, the U.S., and Technologies of Terror, ed. by Cecilia Menjivar and Nestor Rodriguez, University of Texas Press, 2005
Rodríguez Hernández, Saúl, La influencia de los Estados Unidos en el Ejército Colombiano, 1951–1959, Medellín, La Carreta, 2006, ISBN 958-97811-3-6.
External links
Latin America : Trouble at the U.S. Doorstep? from the Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives
Tensions Rise in Latin America over US Military Plan to Use Three Bases in Colombia – video by Democracy Now!
"How Obama can Earn his Nobel Peace Prize" by Ariel Dorfman, The Los Angeles Times
[show]
v
t
e
United States intervention in Latin America
Policy
Monroe Doctrine (1823)
Platt Amendment (1901–04)
Roosevelt Corollary/Big Stick ideology (1904)
Good Neighbor policy (1933)
Dollar diplomacy
Banana Wars
Wars
Mexican–American War (1846-48)
Spanish–American War (1898)
Border War (1910–19)
United States involvement in the Mexican Revolution (1916–19)
Overt actions
and occupations
Paraguay expedition (1858)
First Occupation of Cuba (1899–1902)
Panama–Colombia separation and Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty (1903)
Second Occupation of Cuba (1906–09)
Occupations of Honduras
Occupation of Nicaragua (1912–33)
Occupation of Veracruz (1914)
Occupation of Haiti (1915–34)
Occupation of the Dominican Republic (1916–24)
Occupation of the Dominican Republic (1965–66)
Invasion of Grenada (1983)
Invasion of Panama (1989)
Covert actions
1954 Guatemalan coup d'état
Bay of Pigs Invasion (1961)
Operation MONGOOSE
Project FUBELT
1973 Chilean coup d'état
Disputed claims
2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt
2004 Haitian rebellion
Other
Cuban Missile Crisis (1962)
Foreign policy of the United States
Latin America–United States relations
[show]
v
t
e
Foreign relations of the United States
[show]
Bilateral relations
Africa
East
Burundi
Comoros
Djibouti
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Kenya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mauritius
Mozambique
Rwanda
Seychelles
Somalia
South Sudan
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Middle
Angola
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Chad
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Republic of the Congo
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
São Tomé and Príncipe
North
Algeria
Egypt
Libya
Morocco
Sudan
Tunisia
Southern
Botswana
Lesotho
Namibia
South Africa
Swaziland
West
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cape Verde
Ivory Coast
The Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Liberia
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Togo
Americas
Caribbean
Aruba
Barbados
Cayman Islands
Cuba
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Grenada
Haiti
Jamaica
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Trinidad and Tobago
Central
Belize
Costa Rica
El Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
Nicaragua
Panama
Northern
Bermuda
Canada
trade relations
Mexico
South
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Ecuador
Guyana
Paraguay
Peru
Suriname
Uruguay
Venezuela
Asia
Central
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Tajikistan
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
East
China
Hong Kong
Japan
Macau
Mongolia
North Korea
South Korea
Taiwan
South
Afghanistan
Bangladesh
Bhutan
India
Maldives
Nepal
Pakistan (military relations)
Sri Lanka
Southeast
Brunei
Burma
Cambodia
East Timor
Indonesia
Laos
Malaysia
Philippines
Singapore
Thailand
Vietnam
West
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Cyprus
Georgia
Iran
Iraq
Israel
military relations
Jordan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Oman
Palestine
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Turkey
United Arab Emirates
Yemen
Europe
East
Belarus
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Hungary
Moldova
Poland
Romania
Russia
Slovakia
Ukraine
North
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
Iceland
Ireland
Latvia
Lithuania
Norway
Sweden
United Kingdom
South
Andorra
Albania
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Croatia
Greece
Italy
Kosovo
Macedonia
Malta
Montenegro
Portugal
San Marino
Serbia
Slovenia
Spain
Vatican City
West
Austria
Belgium
France
Germany
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Monaco
Netherlands
Switzerland
Oceania
Australia
Fiji
Kiribati
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Nauru
New Zealand
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Samoa
Solomon Islands
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
Former states
Kingdom of Hawaii
Republic of Texas
Russian Empire
Soviet Union
[show]
Multilateral relations
Arab League
Commonwealth of Nations
European Union
Latin America
United Nations
Third Border Initiative
International organizations
[show]
Doctrines, policies, concepts
Presidential
doctrines
Proclamation of Neutrality
Monroe
Roosevelt Corollary
Good Neighbor policy
Truman
Eisenhower
Kennedy
Johnson
Nixon
Carter
Reagan
Clinton
Bush
Obama
Other doctrines
Lodge Corollary
Stimson
Kirkpatrick
Weinberger
Powell
Rumsfeld
Wolfowitz
Policies and
concepts
Blowback
Containment
Domino theory
Non-interventionism
Progressive realism
Rollback
Special Relationship
Taiwan Relations Act
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Latin_America–United_States_relations&oldid=797157285"
Categories:
History of South America
United States–South American relations
United States–Central American relations
United States–Caribbean relations
Hidden categories:
Pages with reference errors
All articles with dead external links
Articles with dead external links from January 2017
Articles with permanently dead external links
Pages with broken reference names
Webarchive template wayback links
Articles with dead external links from December 2011
Articles with French-language external links
Articles with Spanish-language external links
CS1 errors: dates
Articles with dead external links from May 2017
CS1 Portuguese-language sources (pt)
Articles needing cleanup from April 2016
All pages needing cleanup
Cleanup tagged articles with a reason field from April 2016
Wikipedia pages needing cleanup from April 2016
Use mdy dates from December 2011
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from August 2009
Articles with unsourced statements from April 2013
All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases
Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from April 2013
Articles with unsourced statements from February 2009
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Deutsch
Bahasa Indonesia
Edit links
This version of the page has been revised. Besides normal editing, the reason for revision may have been that this version contains factual inaccuracies, vandalism, or material not compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

value: bdi

attrs: href class title

values: User talk:190.140.135.197 (page does not exist)

value: td

value: tr

value: tbody

value: table

attrs: id class role

values:
revision-info
plainlinks fmbox fmbox-warning
presentation

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-style ambox-Cleanup

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/United_States_of_America
mw-redirect
United States of America

values:
/wiki/Benito_Juarez
mw-redirect
Benito Juarez

values: Army Appropriations Bill (page does not exist)

values: United States involvement in the Mexican Revolution

values:
/wiki/Good_Neighbor_Policy
mw-redirect
Good Neighbor Policy

values: United States and state-sponsored terrorism

values: Illegal immigration to the United States

values:
/wiki/Vicente_Emparan
mw-redirect
Vicente Emparan

values: Juan Vicente Bolívar Palacios (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Jose_Rafael_Revenga
mw-redirect
Jose Rafael Revenga

values:
/wiki/Mosquito_coast
mw-redirect
Mosquito coast

values:
/wiki/Guayana_Essequiba
mw-redirect
Guayana Essequiba

values:
/wiki/Richard_Clough_Anderson
mw-redirect
Richard Clough Anderson

values:
/wiki/Big_Brother_policy
mw-redirect
Big Brother policy

values:
/wiki/James_Garfield
mw-redirect
James Garfield

values: International Conference of American States

values:
/wiki/Schomburgk_Line
mw-redirect
Schomburgk Line

values:
/wiki/Lord_Salisbury
mw-redirect
Lord Salisbury

values:
/wiki/Spain_under_the_Restoration
mw-redirect
Spain under the Restoration

values: History of the Democratic Party (United States)

values: History of the Republican Party (United States)

values:
/wiki/Naval_blockade
mw-redirect
Naval blockade

values: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

values: Washington Protocols (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Dollar_Diplomacy
mw-redirect
Dollar Diplomacy

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (August 2009)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine

values:
/wiki/United_Fruit
mw-redirect
United Fruit

values: 1916 United States occupation of the Dominican Republic

values:
/wiki/Henry_Stimson
mw-redirect
Henry Stimson

values:
/wiki/Franklin_Roosevelt
mw-redirect
Franklin Roosevelt

values:
/wiki/Truman_doctrine
mw-redirect
Truman doctrine

values:
/wiki/Greek_civil_war
mw-redirect
Greek civil war

values:
/wiki/Counter-revolutionary_war
mw-redirect
Counter-revolutionary war

values:
/wiki/Indochina_War
mw-redirect
Indochina War

values: Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance

values:
/wiki/Axis_Powers
mw-redirect
Axis Powers

values: Charter of the Organization of American States

values:
/wiki/Operation_PBSUCCESS
mw-redirect
Operation PBSUCCESS

values:
/wiki/Jacobo_Arbenz_Guzm%C3%A1n
mw-redirect
Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán

values:
/wiki/Operation_Ajax
mw-redirect
Operation Ajax

values: United States invasion of the Dominican Republic

values:
/wiki/Military_of_the_United_States
mw-redirect
Military of the United States

values:
/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_invasion
mw-redirect
Bay of Pigs invasion

values:
/wiki/The_Cuban_Project
mw-redirect
The Cuban Project

values: United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

values: color:#b2b7f2; font-size:3.3em; font-family:'Times New Roman',serif; font-weight:bold; padding:4px 2px 2px; width:0.5em; line-height: 1em;

values: color:#b2b7f2; font-size:3.3em; font-family:'Times New Roman',serif; font-weight:bold; padding:4px 2px 2px; text-align:right; vertical-align:bottom; width:0.5em; line-height: 1em;

values: padding-top:10px; font-size:smaller; line-height:1em; text-align:right;

values: border-collapse:collapse; border-style:none; float:right; margin:0.5em 0.75em; width:33%;

values: Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación Nacional (Venezuela)

values:
/wiki/Urban_guerrilla
mw-redirect
Urban guerrilla

values:
/wiki/Sears_Roebuck
mw-redirect
Sears Roebuck

values:
/wiki/Alfredo_Di_Stefano
mw-redirect
Alfredo Di Stefano

values:
/wiki/United_States_Embassy
mw-redirect
United States Embassy

values:
/wiki/National_Assembly_of_Venezuela
mw-redirect
National Assembly of Venezuela

values:
/wiki/School_of_the_Americas
mw-redirect
School of the Americas

values:
/wiki/Mutually_assured_destruction
mw-redirect
Mutually assured destruction

values:
/wiki/Operation_Brother_Sam
mw-redirect
Operation Brother Sam

values:
/wiki/Operation_Power_Pack
mw-redirect
Operation Power Pack

values: Hugo Panasco Alvim (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Bruce_Palmer,_Jr.
mw-redirect
Bruce Palmer, Jr.

values:
/wiki/Juan_Emilio_Bosch_Gavi%C3%B1o
mw-redirect
Juan Emilio Bosch Gaviño

values:
/wiki/Foco_theory
mw-redirect
Foco theory

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (April 2013)

values:
/wiki/Subversion_(politics)
mw-redirect
Subversion (politics)

values:
/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup
mw-redirect
1973 Chilean coup

values:
/wiki/Military_juntas
mw-redirect
Military juntas

values:
/wiki/Velasco_Alvarado
mw-redirect
Velasco Alvarado

values:
/wiki/State_terror
mw-redirect
State terror

values: United States support of authoritarian regimes

values: The material near this tag possibly uses too-vague attribution or weasel words. (April 2013)

values: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch

values:
/wiki/Transition_to_democracy
mw-redirect
Transition to democracy

values: Permanent Council of the Organization of American States

values:
/wiki/Argentine_intelligence_service
mw-redirect
Argentine intelligence service

values:
/wiki/French_Socialist_Party
mw-redirect
French Socialist Party

values:
/wiki/110_Propositions
mw-redirect
110 Propositions

values:
/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks
mw-redirect
September 11, 2001 attacks

values:
/wiki/Third_World_debt
mw-redirect
Third World debt

values:
/wiki/First_Summit_of_the_Americas
mw-redirect
First Summit of the Americas

values: Chilean presidential election, 2005–2006

values:
/wiki/George_W._Bush_administration
mw-redirect
George W. Bush administration

values:
/wiki/Democratic_socialist
mw-redirect
Democratic socialist

values: Organization of American States Secretary General election, 2005

values:
/wiki/Free_trade_agreement
mw-redirect
Free trade agreement

values: United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement

values:
/wiki/US_Congress
mw-redirect
US Congress

values:
/wiki/Cuzco_Declaration
mw-redirect
Cuzco Declaration

values:
/wiki/South_American_Summit
mw-redirect
South American Summit

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (February 2009)

values: Canada Central American Free Trade Agreement

values: Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership

values: International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

values:
/wiki/Cochabamba_protests_of_2000
mw-redirect
Cochabamba protests of 2000

values:
/wiki/Manuel_Santos
mw-redirect
Manuel Santos

values:
/wiki/Triple_Canopy,_Inc.
mw-redirect
Triple Canopy, Inc.

values:
/wiki/Baghdad%27s_Green_Zone
mw-redirect
Baghdad's Green Zone

values: 2001 Comisión Ética contra la Tortura (page does not exist)

values:
nofollow
http://www.octubre2003.s5.com/
external text

values:
/wiki/Bolivian_Gas_War
mw-redirect
Bolivian Gas War

values:
/wiki/Gonzalo_Sanchez_de_Losada
mw-redirect
Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada

values:
/wiki/Indigenous_Pachakuti_Movement
mw-redirect
Indigenous Pachakuti Movement

values:
/wiki/U.S._State_Department
mw-redirect
U.S. State Department

values:
/wiki/List_of_free_trade_agreements
mw-redirect
List of free trade agreements

values:
/wiki/Anti_Americanism
mw-redirect
Anti Americanism

values:
/wiki/Bolivia-United_States_relations
mw-redirect
Bolivia-United States relations

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: lower-alpha;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://countrystudies.us/panama/4.htm

values: Global Security.org (page does not exist)

values: Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text

values:
/wiki/Political_Affairs
mw-redirect
Political Affairs

values: In Motion (magazine) (page does not exist)

values:
nofollow
http://www.cfr.org/publication/10682/
external text

values: The Democracy Center (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/La_Prensa_Grafica
mw-redirect
La Prensa Grafica

values:
/wiki/United_States_State_Department
mw-redirect
United States State Department

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values: Template:United States intervention in Latin America

values: Template talk:United States intervention in Latin America

values:
/wiki/First_Occupation_of_Cuba
mw-redirect
First Occupation of Cuba

values: United States occupation of the Dominican Republic (1916–24)

values: American occupation of the Dominican Republic (1965–66)

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Template:Foreign relations of the United States

values: Template talk:Foreign relations of the United States

values: Central African Republic–United States relations

values: Democratic Republic of the Congo–United States relations

values: Republic of the Congo–United States relations

values: Equatorial Guinea–United States relations

values: São Tomé and Príncipe–United States relations

values: Dominican Republic–United States relations

values: Saint Kitts and Nevis–United States relations

values: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines–United States relations

values: Trinidad and Tobago–United States relations

values: Pakistan–United States military relations

values: United Arab Emirates–United States relations

values: Bosnia and Herzegovina–United States relations

values: Republic of Macedonia–United States relations

values: Marshall Islands–United States relations

values: Federated States of Micronesia–United States relations

values: Papua New Guinea–United States relations

values: Kingdom of Hawaii–United States relations

values: Republic of Texas–United States relations

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-subgroup

values: Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg

values:
navbox-image
3
width:1px;padding:0px 0px 0px 2px

values: Commonwealth of Nations–United States relations (page does not exist)

values: International organization membership of the United States

values: nowraplinks collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values: Category:United States–South American relations

values: Category:United States–Central American relations

values: Category:All articles with dead external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from January 2017

values: Category:Articles with permanently dead external links

values: Category:Pages with broken reference names

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from December 2011

values: Category:Articles with French-language external links

values: Category:Articles with Spanish-language external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from May 2017

values: Category:CS1 Portuguese-language sources (pt)

values: Category:Articles needing cleanup from April 2016

values: Category:Cleanup tagged articles with a reason field from April 2016

values: Category:Wikipedia pages needing cleanup from April 2016

values: Category:Use mdy dates from December 2011

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from August 2009

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from April 2013

values: Category:All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases

values: Category:Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from April 2013

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from February 2009

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Beziehungen zwischen Lateinamerika und den Vereinigten Staaten – German

values: Hubungan Amerika Latin dengan Amerika Serikat – Indonesian

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Latin_America–United_States_relations rootpage-Latin_America–United_States_relations skin-vector action-view