Domincan Republic "The Dominican economy has had one of the fastest growth rates in the hemisphere over the past decade" CIA Factbook.
-- how can conditions on the same island as the hemisphere's poorest country (Haiti) be so different?
|
President Wilson strongly advocated the notion of a nation's right to self-determination. However, he also believed that although "all people might want freedom whether they could gain and preserve it depended on race." This racist view undoubtedly extended to Latin America resulting in Wilson's "moralistic concern for teaching Latin Americans how to govern themselves." Walter LeFebre calls the "Wilson Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine: "only American oil interests receive concessions. President Wilson intervened in both Haiti and the Dominican Republic, leaving both countries in ruins. |
What are 'good guys' supposed to think about the Dominican Republic? | |
| CIA overthrows Guatemalan elected socialist president In 1951 the Guatemalan people elected Col. Jacobo Arbenz, a socialist, to the presidency. In 1952, Arbenz enabled the communist Guatemalan Labor Party to become a recognized political organization. His goal was to take supposedly "unused" land from large landowners (such as the United States United Fruit Company - UFCO - a major economic asset and banana trading company) and distribute it to peasants. This enabled him to gain popularity among the lower class of Guatemala. Obviously, United Fruit Company was angered by this. In 1954, the U.S. authorized a CIA orchestrated coup and overthrew Arbenz, placing a right-wing official into power. This greatly benefited UFCO because the new ruler would bend to its every desire, and at the same time prevented a communistic or socialistic takeover, such as which have historically created animosity towards Christianity. 1980: April: A junket to Guatemala to visit with government officials and death squad leaders includes top officials and executives from a plethora of right-wing American organizations, including the Young Americans for Freedom, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority, the Young Republicans' National Federation, the American Conservative Union, the Conservative Digest, and such right-wing activists as Howard Phillips of the Conservative Caucus and John Laxalt, president of Reagan's campaign organization Citizens for the Republic, and brother of Reagan campaign chair, Senator Paul Laxalt. Another meeting takes place in the spring, in California, between Reagan and Guatemalan hotel magnate Eduardo Carrette, the man whom Guatemala's dictator General Lucas Garcia has asked to be his new ambassador to the US and a leading figure in Amigos del Pais, a pressure group comprised of businessmen and landowners which Guatemala's recently-resigned Vice President Dr. Francisco Villagran has compared to the John Birch Society. The Amigos are paying $11,000 a month in retainer fees to Deaver and Hannaford, a public relations firm headed by Reagan confidante Michael Deaver, which handles advertising for the Republican presidential campaign. Deaver will become Reagan's Deputy Chief of Staff. Lobbyists for Republican associates of the Amigos are pressuring Congress to "lend a sympathetic ear" to the Amigos' current lobbying campaign for the restoration of military aid and training for the Guatemalan military. Other Reagan advisors who have recently visited Guatemala include including Roger Fontaine, Reagan's future National Security Council assistant for Latin American affairs, and retired Lieutenant General Daniel Graham, a member of Reagan's defense advisory committee, who will also visit El Salvador for President Reagan. Fontaine, an established hard-liner in regional matters, is the former director of Latin American Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, perhaps the nation's most conservative academic-activists center for Latin American affairs. He will bolster Guatemalan hopes in an interview published in the Miami Herald where he will say, "It's pretty clear that Guatemalans will be given what aid they need in order to defend themselves against an armed minority which is aided and abetted by Cubans."http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Foreign_Policy/GuatemalaJul89_Nairn.html |
It is important to recognize that at this point in history, U.S. hegemony in the hemisphere was unquestionable. "The dominant position the United States had built up in the Caribbean region enabled the president to eschew gunboat diplomacy and inaugurate the Good Neighbor Policy." U.S. decision-makers could now afford to explore non-military means of sustaining security in the Caribbean. However, security for whom is subjective -- while the US is good at blowing things up, it is less skilled at providing basic resources to nurture long-term democracy. It's as if we only have weed killer, and expect prize tomatoes to grow without care and feeding. On 28 April 1965, U.S. military forces found themselves in the Dominican Republic protecting U.S. interests for the fourth time in 58 years. Franklin D. Roosevelt's Good Neighbor Policy and the actions of three U.S. administrations (Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson respectively) resulted in the eruption of hostilities in the Dominican Republic in April 1965. |
|
| CIA Facts | ![]() |
![]() |
| U.S. military forces deployed to the Dominican Republic under the false pretense of "protecting American lives." Eventually the true reason for this invasion, fear of Communism was uncovered. The consequences of this deceit were a rift between the Administration, the American media as well as the American people. Furthermore, the Johnson Administration managed to agitate Latin American leaders and reinforce the notion of U.S. imperialism by disregarding the Good Neighbor Policy and reverting to the Roosevelt Corollary. | ||
| Despite the costs, the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic did produce some benefits. The Organization of American States (OAS) illustrated its ability to function as a multi-national body and democratic rule was eventually attained. |
| Talons of the Eagle.
From 1930 to 1945, the U.S. shifted from Dollar Diplomacy and intervention to the Good Neighbor Policy. Rather than seeing the Good Neighbor Policy as a totally new departure from our previous policies since 1823, Smith sees the Good Neighbor Policy as the culmination of these previous trends. He sees it as the culmination and triumph of imperial conquest. The same goals persisted: protection of U.S. geostrategic and economic interests. The goals of economic penetration, security, and hegemony continued but what changed were the means used to achieve those goals. There were costs incurred in the policy of dollar diplomacy. The U.S. had troops stationed in Nicaragua and fought a guerrilla war there. U.S. interventions in Cuba were also costly. Troops were stationed in the Domincan Republic and in Haiti. Latin Americans saw U.S. intervention as imperialism and stated so at Pan American Conferences such as those in Havana in 1928 and Montevideo in 1933. The Latins favored the juridical equality of states, opposed U.S. intervention, rejected the idea of protecting corporations through military means, and rejected the unilateralism of U.S. policy (where the U.S. did whatever it wanted without consultation with Latin American countries) . Smith points out that the good neighbor policy was applied unevenly and that the U.S. used economic leverage to achieve its policy objectives. For example, in Cuba we opposed a democratic revolution in 1933, declaring it communist and supporting a military regime by Batista. This Batista was the same dictator Fidel Castro would remove from power in 1959. In the countries where we applied Dollar Diplomacy (Nic., D. Rep., Haiti), we worked hand in hand with dictatorships which we left in place after U.S. troops departed (the Somozas in Nicaragua, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic). We used loans to protect $5 billion in investments in Latin America. We created the Export-Import Bank whereby we made loans to Latin American countries for the purchase of U.S. goods (really a subsidy to American producers). The Reciprocal Trade Acts were used to create inducements and to tie Latin countries to U.S. objectives such as military preparedness, coordinating security against domestic Nazi groups, providing U.S. military bases once the Second World War began (e.g., Brazil), etc. The sugar quota with Cuba and coffee agreements with Brazil and Colombia gave the U.S. great leverage with those countries whose economies depended on those agreements with the U.S.
In short, Smith argues the Good Neighbor Policy reflected changes in the international system that allowed the United States to shift to economic means to achieve its policy objectives rather than naked and direct military intervention and control. In that sense, there is a parallel between the Good Neighbor Policy and the policy of the U.S. towards Latin america in the post-Cold War era of the 1990's. Besides this overall understanding of Smith's argument, you need to know the specifics of U.S. policy during the Good Neighbor era. Focus on knowing the means used to achieve U.S. ends between 1930 and 1945. There is no substitute for a close reading of the Smith text Talons of the Eagle. |
||