CHAPTER 9 SECTION 2

CHAPTER 9SECTION 2

THE UNITED STATES AND

LATIN AMERICA

• AS THE UNITED STATES ASSERTED ITS INTERESTS IN EAST ASIA AMERICANS CALLED FOR A MORE AGGRESSIVE ROLE IN LATIN AMERICA

• AMERICAN INFLUENCE IN LATIN AMERICA BROUGHT BENEFITS BUT CAUSED ANTI -AMERICAN HOSTILITY AND INSTABILITY TO THE REGION

U.S. POLICY IN PUERTO RICO AND CUBA

• AMERICAN VICTORY OVER SPAIN IN THE SPANISH AMERICAN WAR LIBERATED CUBA AND PUERTO RICO FROM SPANISH RULE

• UNDECIDED ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE TWO SO THE U.S. ASSUMED CONTROL IN PUERTO RICO AND CUBA

• PUERTO RICO REMAINED UNDER CONTROL OF THE U.S. MILITARY

• 1900 – CONGRESS PASSED THE FORAKER ACT – WHICH ESTABLISHED A CIVIL GOVERNMENT IN PUERTO RICO THE FORAKER ACT:• AUTHORIZED THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S. TO APPOINT A GOVERNOR AND PART OF THE PUERTO RICAN LEGISLATURE

• ALLOWED PUERTO RICANS TO FILL THE REST OF THE LEGISLATURE IN A GENERAL ELECTION

•PUERTO RICANS BECOMING CITIZENS OF THE U.S. WAS STILL UNCLEAR – LET TO SERIES OF U.S. SUPREME COURT CASES WHICH THE COURT DETERMINED THE RIGHTS OF PUERTO RICANS

•PRESIDENT WILSON SIGNED THE JONES-SHAFROTH ACT WHICH GRANTED PUERTO RICANS MORE CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS AND GAVE THEM GREATER CONTROL OVER THEIR OWN LEGISLATURE

•MANY PUERTO RICANS WERE UPSET THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE ALL THE SAME RIGHTS AS AMERICANS

CUBA

• THE TREATY OF PARIS GAVE CUBA INDEPENDENCE BUT THE U.S. DID NOT LEAVE UNTIL 1902

• BEFORE THE MILITARY LEFT CONGRESS WANTED CUBA TO ADD THE PLATT AMENDMENT TO THEIR CONSTITUTION WHICH RESTRICTED THE RIGHTS OF CUBANS AND BROUGHT CUBA WITHING THE U.S. SPHERE

•THE PLATT AMENDMENT:

• PREVENTED CUBA FROM SIGNING A TREATY WITH ANOTHER NATION WITHOUT AMERICAN APPROVAL

• REQUIRED CUBA TO LEASE NAVAL STATIONS TO THE U.S. – GUANTANIMO BAY

• GRANTED THE U.S. THE RIGHT TO INTERVENE TO PRESERVE ORDER IN CUBA

• MANY CUBANS WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THE PLATT AMENDMENT – ONLY AGREED TO THE AMENDMENT TO GET THE U.S. MILITARY OUT OF CUBA

• THE U.S. DID NOT WANT CUBA TO BE A BASE FOR A HOSTILE POWER AGAINST THE U.S. - SOVIET UNION LATER

• CUBA ADDED THE AMENDMENT AS PART OF A TREATY WITH THE U.S. – CUBA BECAME PROTECTORATE OF THE U.S.

ROOSEVELT’S “BIG STICK” DIPLOMACY• ROOSEVELT’S POLICY FOR U.S. ACTION IN LATIN AMERICA – DEPENDED ON A STRONG MILITARY TO ACHIEVE AMERICA’S GOALS

• TERM CAME FROM HIS ADMIRATION FOR AN OLD AFRICAN SAYING “SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK; YOU WILL GO FAR”

• ROOSEVELT’S VIEW THAT AMERICA NEEDED TO CARRY A BIG STICK DURING THE AGE OF IMPERIALISM CAME FROM HIS BELIEF IN BALANCE OF POWER PRINCIPLES AND HIS VIEW OF THE U.S. AS A SPECIAL NATION WITH A MORAL RESPONSIBILTIY TO CIVILIZE WEAKER NATIONS

• ROOSEVELT FELT THAT AMERICA’S ELITE – STATESMEN AND CAPTAINS OF INDUSTRY – HAD TO ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE OF INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP

PANAMA CANAL•NOT ROOSEVELT’S PLAN BUT HE PLAYED A MAJOR ROLE IN ITS COMPLETION

•FRENCH COMPANY TRIED TO CONNECT THE ATLANTIC OCEAN TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN THROUGH THE ISTHMUS OF PANAMA – WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL

•THE FRENCH COMPANY CONVINCED THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT TO BUY THE PANAMA ROUTE FOR $40 MILLION

•U.S. NEEDED THE APPROVAL FROM THE COLUMBIAN GOVERNMENT – PANAMA WAS UNDER COLUMBIAN CONTROL – COLUMBIA DEMANDED MORE THAN THE U.S. WAS WILLING TO GIVE

•ROOSEVELT SENT WARSHIPS TO PANAMATO SUPPORT A PANAMANIAN REBELLION AGAINST COLUMBIA – CONVINCED COLUMBIA NOT TO SUPRESS THE PANAMANIANS WHO THEN DECLARED INDEPENDENCE FROM COLUMBIA

• PANAMA THEN GRANTED AMERICA CONTROL OVER THE “CANAL ZONE” – BECAUSE THE CANAL WOULD BE A VITAL TRADE LINK THE U.S. AGREED TO PAY PANAMA $10 MILLION AND AN ANNUAL RENT OF $250,000

• 35,000 WORKERS HELPED DIG THE PANAMA CANAL – VERY DIFFICULT CONDITIONS – DOCTORS NEEDED TO KNOW HOW TO COMBAT TROPICAL DISEASES – MANY WORKERS DIED FROM DISEASE OR ACCIDENTS

• THE CANAL OPENED IN 1914 – CUT 8,000 NAUTICAL MILES FROM THE WEST COAST TO THE EAST COAST OF THE UNITED STATES

ROOSEVELT AND THE MONROE DOCTRINE

• EARLY 1900S THE INABILITY OF LATIN AMERICAN NATIONS TO PAY THEIR DEBTS TO FOREIGN INVESTORS RAISED THE POSSIBILITY OF EUROPEAN INTERVENTION

• ROOSEVELT COROLLARY – UPDATED THE MONROE DOCTRINE FOR THE AGE OF ECONOMIC IMPERIALISM

• IN CASE OF EUROPEAN MILITARY INTERVENTION FOR LATIN AMERICAN WRONGDOING – THE U.S. WOULD ASSUME THE ROLE OF POLICE POWER, RESTORING ORDER AND DEPRIVING OTHERS OF THE EXCUSE TO INTERVENE

• ROOSEVELT ARGUED THIS WOULD KEEP THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE FROM EUROPEAN INTERVENTION – WHICH WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE • SOME LATIN AMERICANS RESENTED THE ROOSEVELT COROLLARY – WERE UPSET BECAUSE HE FELT THAT LATIN AMERICA COULD NOT POLICE THEMSELVES

TAFT AND DOLLAR DIPLOMACY

• TAFT FOLLOWED ROOSEVELT’S BASIC FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVES – HAD BEEN HAND PICKED BY ROOSEVELT TO SUCCEED HIM AS REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FROM PRESIDENT

• TAFT WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE “OPEN DOOR POLICY” IN EAST ASIA AND WANTED STABILITY IN LATIN AMERICA

• TAFT RELIED LESS ON THE “BIG STICK” AND MORE ON DOLLAR DIPLOMACY – HE WANTED TO SUBSTITUTE “DOLLARS FOR BULLETS” – PURPOSE WAS TO INCREASE AMERICAN INVESTMENTS IN BUSINESSES AND BANKS THROUGHTOUT CENTRAL AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

WILSON AND MORAL DIPLOMACY

• WOODROW WILSON CRITICIZED THE FOREIGN POLICIES OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT IN THE 1912 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

• AFTER HIS ELECTION HE PROMISED THE U.S. WOULD “NEVER AGAIN SEEK ONE ADDITIONAL FOOT OF TERRITORY BY CONQUEST” BUT INSTEAD WORK TO PROMOTE “HUMAN RIGHTS, NATIONAL INTEGRITY AND OPPORTUNITY” – WHAT HE CALLED MORAL DIPLOMACY