\chapter{North American interventions in Latin America}
Paco Pena
\chapterauthor{Paco Pena}
The process of emancipation of the Spanish colonies, begun in the early nineteenth century, culminated in the second decade of the last century, ending Spain's domination of the New World.
In 1898, the last strongholds on the continent — Cuba and Puerto Rico — were wrested from Spanish power by the United States, falling under their rule.
@ -33,7 +33,9 @@ Towards the end of the nineteenth century, this policy of expansion allowed the
These few lines have the ambition to tell the story of the imperialist interventions in Latin America, which helped in a significant way to increase the strength of the one that would become the first power on the planet and the spearhead of world capitalism.
The interventionist policy of the United States manifested itself very early in Latin America. Although north Americans had a major adversary in this area — Great Britain — they had always looked with lust at the territories that for three centuries had been subject to Spanish colonial rule and that, at the beginning of the nineteenth century — after their independence — experienced long periods of anarchy, the result of the infighting that developed in almost all the young republics.
The process of territorial expansion of the United States began at the end of the eighteenth century. The border being “elastic” to the west, they acquired various territories between 1792 and 1821 (266).
The process of territorial expansion of the United States began at the end of the eighteenth century. The border being “elastic” to the west, they acquired various territories between 1792 and 1821 \footnote{Vermont, in 1791, Kentucky, in 1792, Tennessee, in 1796.
The latter two territories, along with Mississippi, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, were acquired by the Union in the Treaty of Paris in 1783.
Others, further west, were bought from Bonaparte in 1803.}.
The process continued further west and south, where the voracity of the Union swallowed great extensions of the “middlewest” obtained through the cession or purchase of territories to the European powers.
Purchase and disposal made on the backs of the indigenous populations – “the red skins” – who were turned away and/or exterminated.
This is how the United States managed to significantly increase its initial territory.
@ -44,17 +46,11 @@ This was the case with Florida.
A vassal of the King of Spain, Pedro Menendez de Avilés, founded the city of San Agustin in September 1565.
This peninsula was in turn occupied by the English from 1763 to 1783. The United States, for its part, claimed that the southern border went up to the 31st parallel, but Spain occupied up to the 33rd parallel and there was a serious dispute over the Mississippi, whose navigation was closed by the monopoly it exercised on the traffic of the river.
266 Vermont, in 1791, Kentucky, in 1792, Tennessee, in 1796.
The latter two territories, along with Mississippi, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, were acquired by the Union in the Treaty of Paris in 1783.
Others, further west, were bought from Bonaparte in 1803.
In 1811, taking advantage of the presence of Napoleon's troops in Spain, the North American Congress passed a resolution declaring that it intended to occupy Florida in order to remain there.
The text says a lot about the nascent North American interventionist vocation:
“The United States, in the special circumstances of the current crisis, views with grave concern that some of these territories may pass into the hands of a foreign power...
Its own security forces them to proceed with the temporal occupation of these territories... (which) will remain in our hands for future negotiations. ” (267).
Its own security forces them to proceed with the temporal occupation of these territories... (which) will remain in our hands for future negotiations. ” \footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, Estados Unidos y America Latina, Editorial Patria Grande, Montevideo, 1968, p. 11.}.
In 1818 General Andrew Jackson definitively occupied Florida and, the following year, Spain agreed to sell to the voracious new state, a territory almost as large as England, for the trifle of 5 million dollars...
@ -62,18 +58,13 @@ But the desires of the United States were not limited only to Florida.
Luis de Onis, the Spanish ambassador at the time, warned his government about North American ambitions.
He warned in 1812 — at the time of the second war between the Union and Great Britain — about the real aims of North American diplomacy:
“This government has proposed nothing more and nothing less, to fix its borders from the mouth of the Rio Bravo...
\begin{quote}
\enquote{This government has proposed nothing more and nothing less, to fix its borders from the mouth of the Rio Bravo...
in a straight line towards the Pacific, including the provinces of Texas, Nuevo Santander, Coahuila and part of Nueva Viscaya and Sonora...
It may sound delusional, but it is a fact that the project exists and that they have made a map that includes Cuba as an integral part of this republic. ” (268)
267 Carlos Machado, Documentos, Estados Unidos y America Latina, Editorial Patria Grande, Montevideo, 1968, p. 11.
268 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p.. 13.
It may sound delusional, but it is a fact that the project exists and that they have made a map that includes Cuba as an integral part of this republic.}\end{quote} \footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p.. 13.}
Cuba, already in the sights of the United States.
Ferdinand VII's Spain — put back on its throne after the Napoleonic episode — supported by France, Russia, Prussia and Austria, had thought and tried to reconquer its former American territories.
But interests diverged between the imperialist powers.
@ -83,15 +74,19 @@ Thus, around the second decade of the nineteenth century, when the Spanish monar
The British minister, George Canning, invited the North Americans to make common cause and oppose the Spanish claim.
It was then that former President Jefferson replied to President Monroe who was consulting him on the attitude to have towards the European powers:
“Our fundamental motto must be not to meddle in European imbroglios... (and) not to accept that Europe intervenes in American affairs...
\begin{quote}
\enquote{Our fundamental motto must be not to meddle in European imbroglios... (and) not to accept that Europe intervenes in American affairs...
Britain is the nation that can cause us the most harm; by having it on our side, we do not fear the whole world...”
Britain is the nation that can cause us the most harm; by having it on our side, we do not fear the whole world...}
\end{quote}
Later the former Yankee president clarified his thought:
“We must ask ourselves the following question: do we wish to acquire for our Confederation, some Spanish-American provinces? ...
\begin{quote}
\enquote{We must ask ourselves the following question: do we wish to acquire for our Confederation, some Spanish-American provinces? ...
I sincerely admit that I have always been of the opinion that Cuba would be the most interesting addition we could make to our system of states...
Domination on this island and Florida would give us control of the Gulf of Mexico and the Isthmus states... ” (269)
Domination on this island and Florida would give us control of the Gulf of Mexico and the Isthmus states...}
\end{quote}\footnote{Ibid., p. 15.}
Florida fell into Yankee hands in 1819. Cuba, the obsession with American diplomacy, will be reduced to the state of protectorate in 1898.
@ -103,17 +98,16 @@ On the other hand, the Union would guarantee the independence of the Spanish-Ame
In his seventh annual message of December 2, 1823, President Monroe informed of the conversations he had had with representatives of Russia and Great Britain.
“They were warned that the United States considered Latin American nations to be free and independent, and that consequently they cannot be subject to future colonization by any European power...
We would regard any attempt by them to take any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and security.” (270)
We would regard any attempt by them to take any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and security.”\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 18.}
On the other hand, Monroe, reaffirming North American neutrality in European affairs, entrenched himself in the isolationist policy that would characterize the United States in its relations with Europe:
269 Ibid., p. 15.
270 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 18.
“In the wars between the European powers and in the affairs within their jurisdiction, we have never taken sides...
\begin{quote}
\enquote{In the wars between the European powers and in the affairs within their jurisdiction, we have never taken sides...
Our policy towards Europe – which was adopted at the beginning of the wars that have recently shaken it – remains unchanged:
not to interfere in their internal affairs and to regard de facto governments as legitimate.” (271)
not to interfere in their internal affairs and to regard de facto governments as legitimate.}
\end{quote}\footnote{Ibid., p. 19.}
Although the “Monroe Doctrine” deterred the European powers in their dreams of reconquest, it could not prevent their interference and intervention on several occasions:
England played an important role in La Plata, and succeeded in creating a buffer state in 1828 between Brazil and Argentina, separating from the Provincias Unidas, the Eastern Strip, Uruguay.
@ -130,9 +124,6 @@ On the other hand, in texts that will appear during the decade of the forties, t
Fate would have granted — an idea close to the notion of predestination, dear to Presbyterian Protestantism — to the American nation a civilizing mission, making it the guardian angel of freedom and democracy, while granting it vast territories to conquer, and a vocation of domination over the entire New World.
271 Ibid., p. 19.
The supporters of manifest Destinity, of course, did not say a word about the fate of the thousands of blacks living on the territory of the Union, for whom the manifest destiny manifested itself precisely in the form of brazen slavery.
From the beginning of the independence of the Spanish-American nations, the United States and Great Britain viewed Bolivar's American attempts with a negative eye.
@ -149,18 +140,12 @@ Adams and Clay's instructions tended to act in the direction of maintaining the
“No power, not even Spain... has such a great interest as the United States in the future fate of this island...
We do not want any change in his possession or in his political situation... We will not see with indifference the transfer to another European power than Spain.
Nor do we want it to be ceded or added to a new American state.” (272)
272 Ibid., p. 23.
Nor do we want it to be ceded or added to a new American state.”\footnote{Ibid., p. 23.}
The United States scrupulously applied the idea contained in Monroe's seventh message: “America to the Americans.”
They simply interpreted it as if they had heard: “America to North Americans.”
The history of Mexico's stripping is dramatically instructive in this regard.
\section{The carving up of Mexico}
Texas — a territory larger than France — had always belonged, since the arrival of the conquistadores, to the crown of Spain, and then to independent Mexico.
@ -180,26 +165,19 @@ Another attempt at independence failed the following year. Suggestively began to
In 1835, when a new constitution was approved in Mexico — which would be at the origin of an internal conflict between federalists and centralists — the Yankee settler Stephan Austin proclaimed the independence of Texas.
The United States then took advantage of this opportunity, which favoured its expansionist aims. They sent boats with weapons and ammunition from New Orleans.
Mexico, for its part, intended to enforce its sovereignty and sent the famous General Santa Anna.
After some successes of the Mexican armies at San Patricio, Encinal del Perdido and El Alamo — which the newspapers presented to the public opinion of the United States as the defeat of a sublime cause — Santa Anna was defeated on April 21, 1836 in San Jacinto.
Taken prisoner, he was forced to sign a Leonine Agreement (“Convenio Publico”) at Puerto Velasco on May 14, 1836, where it was agreed that the Mexicans would withdraw from Texas on the southern edge of the Rio Bravo.
The agreement provided that “all special properties, including horses, black slaves, in the hands of the Mexican army or passed on the side of this army, shall be returned to the commander of the Texas forces” (273).
The agreement provided that “all special properties, including horses, black slaves, in the hands of the Mexican army or passed on the side of this army, shall be returned to the commander of the Texas forces” \footnote{Leopoldo Martinez Caroza, La intervenciôn norteamericana en Mexico, 1846-1848, Panorama Editorial, Mexico, 1985, p. 19.}.
The better-equipped Texas troops had imposed an agreement that, twelve years later, would play an important role in the carving up of more than half of Mexico's territories.
North American support for Texas adventurers was confirmed in the forties by President John Tyler, who said of the separation of Texas from Mexico:
“The mere probability that slavery could be abolished in neighbouring territories must be sufficient grounds for annexing them.” (274)
“The mere probability that slavery could be abolished in neighbouring territories must be sufficient grounds for annexing them.” \footnote{Ibid., p. 27}
In 1845, Texas entered the Union as a slave state. The election campaign led by Tyler's successor, James Polk — President of the United States between 1846 and 1850 — had been:
“Annexation of Texas. 54°/40', or death”. (He was referring to the Yankee border and the territories torn from Mexico.)
273 Leopoldo Martinez Caroza, La intervenciôn norteamericana en Mexico, 1846-1848, Panorama Editorial, Mexico, 1985, p. 19.
274 Ibid., p. 27
\section{The Anschluss of New Mexico and California}
Once Texas was swallowed, the next Anschluss was practiced on two other major Mexican provinces: New Mexico and California.
@ -215,12 +193,10 @@ The pretext sought by the United States was provided by a clash between two bord
Polk announced a few days later, in Congress, that Mexico had invaded the territory of the United States and shed North American blood.
War was immediately declared and only a few prominent voices were raised to condemn the planned Anschluss. Among them, Abraham Lincoln, Representative of Illinois:
“I believe that the president is deeply convinced that he is in an incorrect position, that he feels that the blood of this war — such as Abel's — is accusing him.” (275)
“I believe that the president is deeply convinced that he is in an incorrect position, that he feels that the blood of this war — such as Abel's — is accusing him.”\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 32.}
On July 4, when hostilities had already begun, a group of North American adventurers opportunely proclaimed in California the Republic of the Bear, which nevertheless had an ephemeral life.
275 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 32.
The invaders landed in Veracruz and, after heavy fighting, occupied Mexico City in September 1847.
A long list of battles punctuated this war of conquest: Palo Alto, Monterry, Angostura, Veracruz, Cerro Gordo, Padierna, Chapultepec.
@ -251,26 +227,22 @@ These interventions and interferences were not limited to neighboring countries,
The naval expedition to Paraguay in 1858-1859 is an example of this.
\section{The expedition to Paraguay}
In 1851, the United States government had appointed Edward A. Hopkins of the United States and Paraguay Navigation Company as Consul in Asuncion, one of the owners of a shipping company domiciled in Rhode Island.
Hopkins, a former sailor and adventurer, knew Paraguay where he had stayed since 1845.
Armed with letters accrediting him as an official agent of the United States government, he had broken into the corridors of power and knew the Paraguayan president, Carlos Antonio Lopez (276).
Armed with letters accrediting him as an official agent of the United States government, he had broken into the corridors of power and knew the Paraguayan president, Carlos Antonio Lopez\footnote{Carlos Antonio López, 1790-1862, President of Paraguay between 1840 and 1862.}.
A series of intrigues, involving offers of North American mediation to coax its neighbors in a border dispute with private affairs and the interests of the United States, which intended to take advantage of the Parana waterway, resulted in Paraguay's non-ratification of the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation in 1854.
The Paraguay Navigation Company was sanctioned in 1854 for violating Paraguayan legislation and was forbidden to operate in the country.
Hopkins was expelled in turn for disrespect following a confused brawl with Paraguayan soldiers.
276 Carlos Antonio López, 1790-1862, President of Paraguay between 1840 and 1862.
From a friend of Paraguay and President Lopez, he became his fierce enemy, developing in official circles and the entourage of Presidents Pierce, then Buchanan, a propaganda that encouraged North American military intervention in “this country of Berber-Asians”, this “outgrowth of the international body. .. less civilized than the Sultanate of Moscato.”
He asserted in his diatribes that South Americans were barbarians who should “receive treatment accordingly.
Talking with them is a waste of time; we must speak to them with our cannons” (277).
Talking with them is a waste of time; we must speak to them with our cannons” \footnote{Ynsfran Pablo Max, La expedición norteamericana contra el Paraguay, 1858-1859, Editorial Guarania, Mexico, Buenos Aires, 1954, 2 vols., p. 208.}.
It was then that the Water Witch, a North American Navy ship that, exceeding the authorization given to it, crossed the Paraguayan border and arrived at the Brazilian port of Corumba, entered the scene opportunely.
Authorizations for peaceful passage were suspended and a presidential decree banned the navigation of foreign warships.
@ -284,9 +256,8 @@ Then began a major campaign of press and intimidation to force Paraguay to apolo
Finally, in May 1857, the United States Congress approved the dispatch of a “small armada” of twenty ships that set sail in October 1857.
The toast to the company's success was greeted by one of the officers, according to Pablo Max Ynfrans, with an overflowing flight of geopolitical exuberance:
277 Ynsfran Pablo Max, La expedición norteamericana contra el Paraguay, 1858-1859, Editorial Guarania, Mexico, Buenos Aires, 1954, 2 vols., p. 208.
"I raise my glass... so that our difficulties with Paraguay end and we end up annexing the entire basin of the Rio de la Plata... » (278)
\begin{quote}
\enquote{I raise my glass... so that our difficulties with Paraguay end and we end up annexing the entire basin of the Rio de la Plata...} \end{quote}\footnote{Ibid., vol. II, p. 42.}
This wish, fortunately, will not be granted.
@ -300,18 +271,14 @@ The United States and Paraguay Navigation Company, for its part, continued a lon
By the mid-nineteenth century, the conflict of interest between Britain and the United States for control of the Caribbean worsened.
The two countries were led to sign the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty by which the contracting parties declared that they were working for the construction of an interoceanic canal in Nicaraguan territory, without informing Nicaragua of this.
They recognized each other's prerogatives in its future use and asserted that they had no intention of building fortifications or “occupying Nicaragua... nor to exercise domination over any territory of Central America... ” (279)
They recognized each other's prerogatives in its future use and asserted that they had no intention of building fortifications or “occupying Nicaragua... nor to exercise domination over any territory of Central America... ” \footnote{Lemaitre Eduardo, Panamá y su separación de Colombia, Ediciones Corralito de Piedra, Bogota, 1972, p. 66.}
Nicaragua lived, in the fifties of the nineteenth century, like many states in the region, in the midst of continuous civil wars.
In 1854, a conflict between liberals and conservatives escalated into an international conflict: the liberals called for help from Yankee mercenaries. The time for the buccaneers had arrived.
278 Ibid., vol. II, p. 42.
279 Lemaitre Eduardo, Panamá y su separación de Colombia, Ediciones Corralito de Piedra, Bogota, 1972, p. 66.
Among them, William Walker, a staunch supporter of slavery and its extension to Central America, tried to seize Nicaragua, proclaiming himself president in 1856.
Despite the official neutrality displayed by the United States, an emissary of Walker was received by President Franklin Pierce, but the countries of Central America put an end to the adventure (280).
Despite the official neutrality displayed by the United States, an emissary of Walker was received by President Franklin Pierce, but the countries of Central America put an end to the adventure\footnote{An account exists of this episode: \emph{La guerra de Nicaragua}, translated from English by Ricardo Fernádez Guardia, Ediciones Universidad Centroamericana, San José, Costa Rica, 1970.}.
For its part, Britain was trying to resist Yankee power in the region, clinging to a “state” created by it from scratch, the “Kingdom of Mosquitia.”
With imprecise contours, populated by the Miskitos Indians, in a vague place, the "kingdom" had to be on Nicaraguan territory.
@ -328,8 +295,6 @@ What is true, however, is that at the end of the nineteenth century, the United
The United States had become a great industrial power and had reached an imperialist phase that was now vying the other powers for its share in world affairs.
280 An account exists of this episode: \emph{La guerra de Nicaragua}, translated from English by Ricardo Fernádez Guardia, Ediciones Universidad Centroamericana, San José, Costa Rica, 1970.
Some authors point to the role played in the new foreign policy of successive governments of the time by Alfred Mahan, author of The Influence of Maritime Power in History.
Mahan, in this book, recalled the superiority of maritime empires over land powers in history.
@ -340,22 +305,18 @@ strategic in the Yankee Mare Nostrum. The project reveals a interest that goes
In his project, Grant claimed that Santo Domingo was a weak nation, but that its territories were rich, “the richest that exist under the sun, capable of accommodating in luxury 10 million human beings...
The acquisition of Santo Domingo suits us by its position... would give us control over all the islands I told you about...
The acquisition of Santo Domingo... is a national security measure... it is a question of ensuring the control of the commercial traffic of Darien (Panama) and of resolving the unfortunate situation in which Cuba finds itself... “” (281)
The acquisition of Santo Domingo... is a national security measure... it is a question of ensuring the control of the commercial traffic of Darien (Panama) and of resolving the unfortunate situation in which Cuba finds itself...” \footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 41.}
From the “belly of the beast”, and in front of the plans for annexation of Santo Domingo and Cuba, the pen of the apostle of Cuban independence, José Marti, rose in New York on March 21, 1889.
Marti addressed a clarification to The Manufacturer where he stigmatized the unignified Cubans who called for the outright annexation of the island by the United States:
“No dignified Cuban can want to see his country united with another... Those who went to war and were exiled... Those who build with their work... a fireplace,
\begin{quote}
\enquote{No dignified Cuban can want to see his country united with another... Those who went to war and were exiled... Those who build with their work... a fireplace,
... engineers, teachers, journalists, lawyers and poets... do not desire annexation by the United States and are suspicious of the evil elements who, like gusanos in blood,
have begun their work of destruction... ” (282)
281 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 41.
282 Ibid., p. 43.
have begun their work of destruction...} \end{quote} \footnote{Ibid., p. 43.}
The United States, imbued with a very strong nationalist sentiment — it was the time of “Jingoism” (283) — went so far as to consider an intervention against distant Chile.
Indeed, in 1891 took place the Baltimore incident in Valparaiso (284).
The United States, imbued with a very strong nationalist sentiment — it was the time of “Jingoism” \footnote{Jingoism: “English term synonymous with patriotic chauvinism”, Universalis.} — went so far as to consider an intervention against distant Chile.
Indeed, in 1891 took place the Baltimore incident in Valparaiso \footnote{Vial Gonzalo, Historia de Chile, vol. II (1891-1920), Santillana editions, Santiago de Chile, 1983.}.
The Baltimore was a 4,600-ton Yankee warship that had just been built in England. It had the reputation of being “the fastest boat in the world.”
It was in front of the Chilean coasts as soon as April 1891 — during the civil war that had broken out against President Balmaceda — its mission being to protect North American nationals.
@ -366,14 +327,10 @@ As a result of the general brawl, several sailors were wounded with knives. Two
However, in a banal brawl, the United States engaged in an international conflict, blaming the new Chilean government — which, supported by London, had just won the civil war against President Balmaceda — and adopted an arrogant attitude that the Chilean government deemed unacceptable.
The war preparations of Benjamin Harrison's North American government were well advanced.
Gonzalo Vial reports that the father of the “naval power” himself, Alfred Mahan was called for consultations in Washington (285).
Gonzalo Vial reports that the father of the “naval power” himself, Alfred Mahan was called for consultations in Washington \footnote{Gonzalo Vial, op. cit. cit., p. 165.}.
The Chilean government bowed to the threat of the use of force and agreed to apologize to the United States, compensated the families of the sailors, and withdrew expressions held by Foreign Minister Manuel Antonio Matta, considered offensive by North Americans.
283 Jingoism: “English term synonymous with patriotic chauvinism”, Universalis.
284 Vial Gonzalo, Historia de Chile, vol. II (1891-1920), Santillana editions, Santiago de Chile, 1983.
285 Gonzalo Vial, op. cit. cit., p. 165.
In reality, the conflict of interest between the United States and Great Britain was through interposed countries.
Thus, three years later, in 1895, there was a border conflict between Venezuela and the colonial georgetown government in British Guiana.
@ -409,7 +366,7 @@ It was Wood himself who convened a constituent assembly.
An amendment drafted by Connecticut Senator Orville Platt was then introduced, despite opposition from several constituents who considered it an unacceptable interference that violated Cuba's sovereignty and independence.
In Havana, demonstrations broke out against this diktat and Governor Wood issued an ultimatum:
“The United States will continue to occupy the island until a Cuban government is organized, whose constitution bears, as an integral part of it, all the precepts of the Platt Amendment.” (286)
“The United States will continue to occupy the island until a Cuban government is organized, whose constitution bears, as an integral part of it, all the precepts of the Platt Amendment.” \footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 53.}
The Platt amendment was a blatant demonstration of the state of vassalization in which Cuba had been placed. On May 23, 1903, it was incorporated into the constitution.
It was only in 1934 that certain clauses were amended. Here are some pearls:
@ -418,21 +375,16 @@ Article I: “The Government of Cuba shall not sign any agreement which allows a
Article III was particularly humiliating:
“The government of Cuba consents to the United States being able to exercise the right to intervene to preserve Cuban independence (sic!) and the maintenance of an adequate government for the protection of life, property... ”
286 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 53.
Article VII gave the right to establish military bases on Cuban territory. Guantanamo is, in the news, living proof of a supposedly bygone era.
Governor Wood was not mistaken when, in a letter to Roosevelt in 1903, he wrote:
“Little, if any, independence has left Cuba with the Platt Amendment. The most sensitive Cubans understand this and think that the only positive thing left for them to do is to call for annexation. ” (287)
\begin{quote}
\enquote{Little, if any, independence has left Cuba with the Platt Amendment. The most sensitive Cubans understand this and think that the only positive thing left for them to do is to call for annexation.} \end{quote} \footnote{Ibid., p. 55.}
Invoking the amendment, the Yankee troops will land several times: in 1906, 1912, 1917.
It was only in 1934 that Franklin D. Roosevelt agreed to withdraw certain clauses, particularly binding.
287 Ibid., p. 55.
\section{The Drago Doctrine and the “Roosevelt Corollaries” of the Monroe Doctrine}
In December 1902, British, German and Italian warships appeared in front of the Venezuelan coast, sank a few ships and blocked ports.
@ -446,19 +398,14 @@ The "Drago doctrine" was born.
But Roosevelt did not intend to let the European powers police his area of influence. He reserved this police right only for the United States.
On December 6, 1904, in his annual message, the North American president stated:
“If a nation demonstrates that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and in a decent manner... if it maintains internal order and pays its debts, it will not need the intervention of the United States... Mistakes... or impotence... can force the United States... to exercise an international police role...” (288)
“If a nation demonstrates that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and in a decent manner... if it maintains internal order and pays its debts, it will not need the intervention of the United States... Mistakes... or impotence... can force the United States... to exercise an international police role...”\footnote{Ibid., p. 64.}
A year after Roosevelt — who had been New York's police chief — warned in his annual message to Latin American nations that he intended not to apply the “Monroe Doctrine,” that is, not to prevent the punitive actions of foreign powers in the continent:
“If a republic of the South... makes a mistake against any nation... The Monroe Doctrine would not require us to intervene to prevent the punishment of fault, except to prevent punishment from turning into an occupation of the territory... ” (289)
288 Ibid., p. 64.
289 Ibid., p. 66.
“If a republic of the South... makes a mistake against any nation... The Monroe Doctrine would not require us to intervene to prevent the punishment of fault, except to prevent punishment from turning into an occupation of the territory... ”\footnote{Ibid., p. 66.}
Roosevelt's two speeches will serve as a justification for the Yankee imperialist policy that will result in interventions in Panama, Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti and Santo Domingo.
The Big Stick policy — “speak softly and take with you a big stick” — would be the official policy of the Yankee government for the first decades of the century.
\section{The secession of Panama}
Since the time of the Spanish conquest, many people had striven to imagine an inter-oceanic passage in Central America.
@ -484,16 +431,13 @@ The California gold rush forced thousands of men to cross the isthmus — a must
Several draft treaties were submitted by the Yankee companies to the Colombians, but they were not approved by the Congress of Bogota.
Yankee Ambassador Sullivan wrote to his government in 1869:
“If you want to get the rights to the canal through a route that is not a treaty, things can be easier in the Colombian Congress with some funds from the secret service.” (290).
\begin{quote}
\enquote{If you want to get the rights to the canal through a route that is not a treaty, things can be easier in the Colombian Congress with some funds from the secret service.} \end{quote} \footnote{Lemaitre Edouardo, op. cit., p. 75.}.
But, despite North American efforts, it was Lucien Bonaparte Wyse — grandson of Lucien Bonaparte — who, between 1878 and 1880, obtained, for the French of the “International Civil Society”, ”the exclusive privilege for the execution and exploitation through his territory of a maritime canal between the Atlantic and the Pacific”(291).
But, despite North American efforts, it was Lucien Bonaparte Wyse — grandson of Lucien Bonaparte — who, between 1878 and 1880, obtained, for the French of the “International Civil Society”, ”the exclusive privilege for the execution and exploitation through his territory of a maritime canal between the Atlantic and the Pacific”\footnote{Ibid., p. 95.}.
U.S. President Rutherford Hayes threatened and declared that he wanted to break through another canal in Nicaragua.
He warned the international community by demanding “the right to exercise an exclusive protectorate on the canal that the French plan to break into Colombian territory.” (292)
290 Lemaitre Edouardo, op. cit., p. 75.
291 Ibid., p. 95.
292 Ibid., p. 128.
He warned the international community by demanding “the right to exercise an exclusive protectorate on the canal that the French plan to break into Colombian territory.” \footnote{Ibid., p. 128.}
Wyse convinced Ferdinand de Lesseps – the builder of the Suez Canal in 1869 – to take charge of the work, financed by a loan launched by the “Universal Company of the Inter-Oceanic Canal”.
@ -506,22 +450,19 @@ The majority of Colombian senators considered the project to be an attack on Col
Faced with this refusal, the United States provoked the secession and uprising of the Colombian province of Panama.
One day before the Declaration of Independence, on November 3, 1903, the State Department sent a cable to the Yankee consul in Panama:
“Inform the Department as soon as the uprising takes place... Not yet, the uprising must occur during the night.... ” (293).
“Inform the Department as soon as the uprising takes place... Not yet, the uprising must occur during the night.... ”\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 57.}.
The uprising was proclaimed and a junta was formed in Puerto Colon.
Yankee troops disembarked from ships, which conveniently were on the spot and which prevented the Colombian forces from putting down the rebellion.
On November 6, the United States recognized Panama's “independence.”
Philippe Bunau-Varilla, a French citizen — who had taken part in the rebellion without moving from the 1162 suite of the Waldorf Astoria in New York — later acknowledged that the idea of secession had been discussed with President Roosevelt (294).
Philippe Bunau-Varilla, a French citizen — who had taken part in the rebellion without moving from the 1162 suite of the Waldorf Astoria in New York — later acknowledged that the idea of secession had been discussed with President Roosevelt \footnote{Buneau Varilla Philippe, From Panama to Verdun, p. 162 et seq.}.
He was hastily appointed Minister Plenipotentiary of Panama by the junta and on 18 November in Washington signed with Secretary of State Hay — a day before the panamanian envoys arrived — a Leonine treaty that mortgaged the sovereignty of the isthmus in perpetuity.
Three years later, Theodore Roosevelt received the Nobel Peace Prize.
293 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 57.
294 Buneau Varilla Philippe, From Panama to Verdun, p. 162 et seq.
In 1936, Roosevelt (Franklin) made some adjustments to the treaty.
The head of the National Guard, Colonel José Antonio Remon, succeeded in 1955 in obtaining some modifications from Eisenhower.
@ -543,7 +484,7 @@ The canal opened a new path for manifest destinity.
It was in 1905 that, “answering the call” of several leaders of the Dominican oligarchy, the future Nobel Prize, “Teddy” Roosevelt, installed — with the support of the Marines — Yankee tax collectors in the customs of Santo Domingo... The presence of diligent experts lasted four years.
Secretary of State Elihu Root signaled in those years that interventions would take place “whenever North American capital was in danger” (295).
Secretary of State Elihu Root signaled in those years that interventions would take place “whenever North American capital was in danger” \footnote{Castor Sucy, La ocupaciôn norteamericana de Haitî y sus consecuencias, Casa de las Américas, La Habana, 1974, p. 22.}.
A new landing of marines in 1916 put Santo Domingo under the Yankee boot until 1924.
@ -562,20 +503,14 @@ Precedent of the future oath taken in 1989 in Panama, in a Yankee base, by “Pr
In Guatemala, the North American-owned fruit company United Fruit — including Foster Dulles, Secretary of State and brother of the head of the CI.A. — had been operating in the region since the turn of the century.
A true state within a state, it had signed a first contract in 1901 with the Guatemalan dictator Estrada Cabrera, immortalized by Miguel Angel Asturias in El Senor Presidente.
295 Castor Sucy, La ocupaciôn norteamericana de Haitî y sus consecuencias, Casa de las Américas, La Habana, 1974, p. 22.
By the end of the Great War, the United States had begun to oust European influence — mainly British, but also German and French — from Latin America.
Over this period, Cardoso and Faletto report that “... the American presence expanded rapidly...
The countries of the Pacific coast were fully incorporated into the economy of the United States and those of the Atlantic, such as Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina, fell under its influence.” (296)
The countries of the Pacific coast were fully incorporated into the economy of the United States and those of the Atlantic, such as Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina, fell under its influence.” \footnote{Cardoso F. H. and E. Faletto, Dependency and Development in Latin America, PUF, 1983, p. 83.}
From the end of the twenties, North American capital will exercise an undeniable preponderance in the region.
The presence of Yankee capital had its corollary in an imperialist policy which, as we have seen, manifested itself several times throughout those years. The new interventions in Mexico were an example of this.
\section{Interventions in Veracruz and Tampico}
@ -591,26 +526,19 @@ At the same time he sketched a rapprochement with Germany and Japan.
In the meantime, Wilson had succeeded Taft and deployed warships to the Mexican coast.
Thus, on April 16, 1914, an incident occurred between Mexican soldiers and Yankee sailors, who had illegally landed.
296 Cardoso F. H. and E. Faletto, Dependency and Development in Latin America, PUF, 1983, p. 83.
Unacceptable demands for reparation were addressed to the Mexicans and, at the expiration of an ultimatum, 50 warships carrying 23,000 men presented themselves at Tampico.
On the 20th the landing took place in Veracruz. Despite fierce resistance, Yankee troops managed to seize the city and get their hands on \$8 million that was in the coffers of customs.
On the same day, President Wilson addressed Congress for approval “so that the armed forces of the United States may be employed (against) General Huerta... and obtain from him the recognition of our rights... ” (297)
On the same day, President Wilson addressed Congress for approval “so that the armed forces of the United States may be employed (against) General Huerta... and obtain from him the recognition of our rights... ” \footnote{Carlos Machado, \emph{Documentos, op. cit.}, p. 75.}
Five years later, in 1919, Woodrow Wilson was also awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
And when in 1924, General Obregon appointed his successor – Elias Calles – part of the army did not accept this decision and rose up.
Calles exerted a harsh repression and counted with the support of the Yankee troops to put down this rebellion as well as that of “cristeros”, who had revolted against the measures taken by Calles against the Church and who for three years (1926-1929) stood up to the army.
\section{Intervention in Haiti}
North American investments were estimated at \$15 million in Haiti.
Aside from interests in sugar, transportation and ports, Yankee investors owned 50\% of the shares in the Haitian National Bank.
@ -621,7 +549,7 @@ He played a leading role in the conflict between the government of Davilmar Theo
On December 17, 1914, at his request, marines from the cruiser Machias disembarked and took away \$500,000 belonging to Haiti from the vaults of the Haitian National Bank.
Faced with protests from the Haitian government, Secretary of State Bryan signaled that the United States must “protect North American interests that were under threat,” adding that this was “a simple transfer of funds” (298).
Faced with protests from the Haitian government, Secretary of State Bryan signaled that the United States must “protect North American interests that were under threat,” adding that this was “a simple transfer of funds” \footnote{Castor Sucy, op. cit. cit., p. 28.}.
Pressure from Yankee businessmen, addressed to the State Department, wanted to push it to seize control of Haitian customs.
@ -636,7 +564,7 @@ It was Capperton himself who gave the green light for the appointment of Sudre D
Three days later, the draft agreement with the United States was submitted to deputies and senators.
The conditions were so humiliating for Haiti that within this submissive assembly there were voices of protest:
“According to the statements of their agents, the government of the United States — in the name of humanity — carried out a humanitarian intervention in our country and, with its bayonets..., its guns and its cruisers, presented us with a project.
So what is this project? A protectorate imposed on Haiti by mister Wilson... ” (299)
So what is this project? A protectorate imposed on Haiti by mister Wilson... ” \footnote{Ibid., p. 35.}
The project was approved on 16 November. In 1918 a new constitution was promulgated, the inspiration and one of the drafters of which was the undersecretary of the Yankee Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, theorist of the doctrine of "good neighborliness".
@ -653,11 +581,6 @@ from 23,490 in 1915, the number rose in 1920 to more than 30,000. Another migrat
The shameless collaboration of the bourgeois elites was counterbalanced by the epic of the “Cacos” of Charlemagne Peralte, who for four years (1915-1919), practiced a guerrilla war and stood up to the occupying troops before being treacherously murdered.
The marines did not leave Haitian territory until July 1934.
297 Carlos Machado, \emph{Documentos, op. cit.}, p. 75.
298 Castor Sucy, op. cit. cit., p. 28.
299 Ibid., p. 35.
\section{The third intervention in Nicaragua}
@ -670,20 +593,17 @@ In December 1926, Vice President Juan Bautista Sacasa led a force to restore leg
One of the liberal leaders, Augusto César Sandino, opposed it and returned to the northern mountains.
On January 10, 1927, U.S. President Calvin Coolidge, in his annual message, explained that the Yankee intervention had proved necessary because “now we have great investments in sawmills, mines, coffee and bananas plantations...
If the revolution continued, North American investment would be seriously affected... ” (300)
If the revolution continued, North American investment would be seriously affected... ” Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 85.
Sandino and his “crazy little army” will resist victoriously in the mountains for six years the Yankee troops, who engaged in looting and bombing the countryside and villages.
Sandino turned the struggle for the restoration of flouted legality into a war of national liberation against the foreign occupier:
“I am fighting to expel the foreign invader from my homeland...
The only way to put an end to this struggle is for the forces that have invaded the national soil to withdraw immediately...” (301)
The only way to put an end to this struggle is for the forces that have invaded the national soil to withdraw immediately...” Du rêve à la Révolution, Solidarité Nicaragua N° 3, Paris, 1982, p. 5.
Faced with the impossibility of a military victory, the United States pushed for a political agreement:
Sacasa, the vice president became president as Sandino demanded and the marines left Nicaragua in January 1933.
300 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 85.
301 Du rêve à la Révolution, Solidarité Nicaragua N° 3, Paris, 1982, p. 5.
But the real strongman, the head of the National Guard, Anastasio Somoza, a former poker player and counterfeiter, was devoted to the Yankees.
It was he who organized, on February 21, 1934, the kidnapping and assassination of Sandino. This crime opened the doors of power to him in 1936.
@ -692,7 +612,6 @@ Faithful to imperialist interests, his government was a series of abjections, cr
Franklin D. Roosevelt had said of Somoza, the man of the United States: “Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch.”
\section{The Chaco War: An Expression of Imperialist Rivalries}
@ -710,7 +629,8 @@ The Life Conference of American States meeting in Havana in 1928 condemned Yanke
At the VII Conference of 1933 in Montevideo, Franklin D. Roosevelt had to set out the Good Neighbour Policy, and the conference in the section on “Rights and Duties” stated:
“No State has the right to intervene in the internal affairs of another State.” (302)
\begin{quote}
\enquote{No State has the right to intervene in the internal affairs of another State.”} \end{quote}\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 87.}
Yankee Secretary of State Cordell Hull voted for the article “with reservation,” but avoided a condemnation of U.S. customs protectionism.
@ -720,18 +640,13 @@ It was during the Second World War that these meetings took place and the United
Only Chile and Argentina refused to bend. It was not until 1944 that the Argentine government broke with Germany and Japan, which provoked a coup, organized by soldiers who disagreed with this decision.
In 1945, the “Chapultepec Act”, approved on the occasion of the “Inter-American Conference on the Problems of War and Peace”, celebrated in Mexico — where the absence of Argentina had been noticed — committed the countries of the New World to face the aggressor together in the event of an attack.
Article 3 specified that: “Any aggression ... against an American state will be considered aggression against the signatory states. ” (303)
Article 3 specified that: “Any aggression ... against an American state will be considered aggression against the signatory states. ” \footnote{Ibid., p. 89.}
This provision, which should have played fully in 1982, on the occasion of the Falklands War, was not applied.
On September 2, 1947, the “Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance” was signed in Rio de Janeiro, defining the scope of the Mexican Conference.
Argentina delayed until 1950 to affix its signature.
302 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit. cit., p. 87.
303 Ibid., p. 89.
\section{The United States and Perón}
@ -742,17 +657,12 @@ He advocated a nationalist policy that offended North American interests, and th
The Yankee ambassador in Buenos Aires, Sprulle Braden, a man with the Esso oil company, led an openly anti-Peronist campaign.
Supported by the Communists, he intervened in the current presidential campaign, publishing a “Blue Book” in which he accused Perón as a Nazi.
Perón retaliated in a “Blue and White Book,” where he asserted that the United States wanted to ”install... a government of their own, a puppet government, and for this they began by ensuring the assistance of all the “Quisling” available. ” (304)
For its part, through Ambassador Braden, the White House did not mince its words: “The majority of the Argentine people have always been democrats and contrary to totalitarian ideas... the government follows the German model of 1933...”(305)
Perón retaliated in a “Blue and White Book,” where he asserted that the United States wanted to ”install... a government of their own, a puppet government, and for this they began by ensuring the assistance of all the “Quisling” available. ” \footnote{Ibidem, p. 90.}
For its part, through Ambassador Braden, the White House did not mince its words: “The majority of the Argentine people have always been democrats and contrary to totalitarian ideas... the government follows the German model of 1933...”\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 91.}
The election result gave Perón a large majority, and the Saturday Evening Post newspaper, commenting on the State Department's policy of intervention in Argentine internal affairs, wrote:
“This is evidence of political schizophrenia that undermines North American prestige and influence.
The Argentine people have responded as any people would have replied when foreigners feel entitled to tell them what policy they should follow... ” (306)
304 Ibidem, p. 90.
305 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 91.
306 Ibid.
The Argentine people have responded as any people would have replied when foreigners feel entitled to tell them what policy they should follow... ” \footnote{Ibid.}
\section{The “guatemalazo”}
@ -773,7 +683,7 @@ It was not to reckon with the reaction of the powerful Mamita Yunai, Foster Dull
In the midst of the Cold War, they stirred up the scarecrow of communism, and in the Pan-American Conference in Caracas (March 1954), Foster Dulles attempted to equate the presence of communists in any government in the hemisphere with “extra-continental aggression.”
Meanwhile, his younger brother Allen was arming a “liberation” army with the complicity of the Honduran government, which placed itself under the orders of Colonel Castillo Armas, linked to the International Railways of Center America, a subsidiary of united Fruit.
In the Caracas conference, Foster Dulles declared that “the domination and control of the political institutions of any American state by the international communist movement would constitute an intervention by a foreign power, and would be a threat to peace in America.”(307).
In the Caracas conference, Foster Dulles declared that “the domination and control of the political institutions of any American state by the international communist movement would constitute an intervention by a foreign power, and would be a threat to peace in America.”\footnote{Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 96.}.
Arbenz's government had expropriated land, established social security, built roads — the United Fruit held a monopoly on transportation — and laid the groundwork for the construction of a new port, the only usable one belonging to Mamita Yunai.
At the same time, he undertook a reform of education, while keeping political rights and freedoms once unknown.
@ -788,9 +698,7 @@ The Guatemalan spring had lived.
As soon as he came to power, Castillo Armas repealed the land reform and other measures taken by Jacobo Arbenz.
307 Carlos Machado, Documentos, op. cit., p. 96.
307
\section{Bay of Pigs}
@ -810,8 +718,9 @@ Within days, the attempted invasion was quelled by Cuban militiamen and more tha
Kennedy was appalled and denied Yankee involvement in the affair.
But when the evidence of U.S. involvement became irrefutable—pilots shot down by the Cuban DCA—and although the planned invasion had been bequeathed to him by his predecessor, Dwight Eisenhower, he took responsibility for the failure in these terms:
“If ever the inter-American doctrine of non-intervention obscures or allows a policy of passivity, if the nations of this hemisphere fail in their struggle against communist penetration, then I want to
let it be clear that my Government will not hesitate to assume its responsibilities... If this moment ever comes, we do not intend to receive lessons of non-intervention...” (308).
\begin{quote}
\enquote{If ever the inter-American doctrine of non-intervention obscures or allows a policy of passivity, if the nations of this hemisphere fail in their struggle against communist penetration, then I want to
let it be clear that my Government will not hesitate to assume its responsibilities... If this moment ever comes, we do not intend to receive lessons of non-intervention...} \end{quote}\footnote{Ibid., p. 101.}.
Since then, Cuba's history has been the story of continuous resistance to thwart intervention plans and to counter U.S. interference with the island.
@ -833,9 +742,6 @@ Kennedy, panicked by the growing prestige of the Cuban Revolution, launched in 1
This little “Marshall Plan” was abandoned by Johnson a few years later when the effort to fight communism resulted in collusion between Washington and the Latin American military.
308 Ibid., p. 101.
\section{Coup in Brazil}
@ -883,16 +789,13 @@ to disguise the Yankee intervention with the participation of troops from four m
the Brazil of the military putschists, Nicaragua of Somoza, Paraguay of Stroessner and Honduras.
It was for the North Americans to prevent the establishment of a new Cuba, which justified, in their eyes, all the breaches of the standards established by the O.E.A. itself:
“I understood that there was no time to waste, talk and consult... American nations cannot, must not and will not allow the establishment of another communist government in the Western Hemisphere... ” (309)
“I understood that there was no time to waste, talk and consult... American nations cannot, must not and will not allow the establishment of another communist government in the Western Hemisphere... ” \footnote{Ibid., p. 109.}
In September of the same year, a resolution of the United States House of Representatives (Selden Resolution) declared that, faced with the mere threat of communist danger, American nations could and should assist each other.
Balaguer, the former loyalist of dictator Trujillo, was accepted by North Americans and elected president in 1966.
Colonel Caamaño, crowned with immense prestige, died a few years later, in a last attempt to bring the armed struggle to Santo Domingo.
309 Ibid., p. 109.
\section{The Thousand Days of Popular Unity}
@ -911,16 +814,13 @@ The Yankee intervention in Chile has been widely known since the publication of
U.S. action began — in collusion with the Chilean right — during the presidential campaign.
The CIA copiously watered newspapers and parties of the center and the right.
The ineffable Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, made it a point to declare in June 1970:
“I don't see why we would fold our arms without acting and watch a country become communist because of the irresponsibility of its people... ” (310)
“I don't see why we would fold our arms without acting and watch a country become communist because of the irresponsibility of its people... ” \footnote{Davis Nathaniel, \emph{Los dos ultimos anos de Salvador Allende}, Plazay Janes editores, Barcelona, 1986, p. 18.}
The head of Chile's main news outlet, El Mercurio, and the vice president of Pepsi-Cola met on September 15, 1970 in Washington, D.C., with CIA Director Richard Helms.
On the evening of the same day, Henry Kissinger, Richard Helms and President Nixon coordinated a plan of action — “Track I”, then, “Track II,” to prevent Congress from proclaiming Salvador Allende President of the Republic.
According to the Church Commission, Nixon's instructions were precise, written in his own hand:
“Save Chile... we must not deal with the risks, do not compromise the embassy, 10 million if necessary ... full-time work... action plan in 48 hours... ” (311)
310 Davis Nathaniel, \emph{Los dos ultimos anos de Salvador Allende}, Plazay Janes editores, Barcelona, 1986, p. 18.
311 Ibid., p. 19.
“Save Chile... we must not deal with the risks, do not compromise the embassy, 10 million if necessary ... full-time work... action plan in 48 hours... ” \footnote{Ibid., p. 19.}
The “Track II” plan included several phases, ranging from the corruption of deputies, generals and admirals, to the assassination of the army commander-in-chief who refused to follow the putschists and was ambushed in October 1970.
@ -1016,7 +916,7 @@ Panama, under the terms of the treaty, would gain full sovereignty over the cana
General Torrijos, head of the National Guard, had to overcome the obstacles and encroachments that the Yankee senators — enemies of the treaty — opposed to the signing of the treaty.
Senator De Concini's amendment added a clause that sought to guarantee the United States the right to intervene militarily in the canal:
“If the canal were closed or its operations prevented... the United States will have the right to take action... including the use of military force... ” (312).
“If the canal were closed or its operations prevented... the United States will have the right to take action... including the use of military force... ” \footnote{Conte Porras Jorge, \section{Del Tratado Hay-Buneau Varilla, al Tratado Torrijos-Carter}, Impresora Panama, 1982, p. 144.}.
Torrijos then wrote to Carter and Carter pledged “not to use this amendment as a legal justification for possible further intervention in Panama.”
@ -1055,14 +955,12 @@ In May 1994, Ernesto Perez Valladares of Noriega's party triumphed in the electi
Panamanians are holding their breath waiting for the year 2000 which, according to the last Treaty, will bring them full sovereignty over the canal. Unless...
312 Conte Porras Jorge, \section{Del Tratado Hay-Buneau Varilla, al Tratado Torrijos-Carter}, Impresora Panama, 1982, p. 144.
\section{Humanitarian response in Haiti}
Contrary to what many people think they know, the North American intervention of the nineties in Haiti, does not date from October 15, 1994, but...
of September 30, 1991, when President Aristide was overthrown by a coup d'état organized by Haitian soldiers with the “assistance of the CIA and the American Embassy”. (313)
of September 30, 1991, when President Aristide was overthrown by a coup d'état organized by Haitian soldiers with the “assistance of the CIA and the American Embassy”. \footnote{Wargny Christophe, Manière de voir N° 33, February 1997, Le Monde Diplomatique, p. 68-C.}
In 1971, Jean-Claude Duvalier, Baby Doc, succeeded his father — François Duvalier, Papa Doc — in power since 1957.
Baby Doc was overthrown in 1986, and moved to France, once the government of Prime Minister Laurent Fabius granted him a residence permit.
@ -1070,8 +968,7 @@ He found a very comfortable refuge on the Côte d'Azur where, since then, he has
General Raoul Cendras, head of the junta that overthrew Father Aristide in September 1991, had perpetrated the 172nd coup since Haiti gained independence in 1804, almost two centuries ago.
Christophe Wargny wrote, in 1996, with Pierre Mouterde, a book that bears the suggestive title of \emph{Apre bal tambou lou: five years of American duplicity in Haiti, 1991-1996} (314),
Christophe Wargny wrote, in 1996, with Pierre Mouterde, a book that bears the suggestive title of \emph{Apre bal tambou lou: five years of American duplicity in Haiti, 1991-1996} \footnote{Éditions Austral, 1996.},
where he shows the combined action against Aristide — not free of contradictions — by the United States, the military, the Haitian oligarchy and the Vatican.
The latter, being opposed to Father Aristide, because of his commitment to liberation theology.
@ -1080,12 +977,8 @@ It was a “humanitarian operation” authorized by the UN.
Thus, three years after his overthrow, Father Aristide returned to power, transported by the power that had contributed to his downfall.
313 Wargny Christophe, Manière de voir N° 33, February 1997, Le Monde Diplomatique, p. 68-C.
314 Éditions Austral, 1996.
Paco Peña
\rauthor{Paco Peña}
Paco Peña is a Chilean professor, journalist, contributor to Punto Final.
BBOCANON
2 years ago