The United States Foreign Policy in Latin America
Background:
The DREAM Act has passed in both the states of California and Illinois. Though much of the criticism of the DREAM Act has been that the act gives benefits to illegal immigrants who have essentially broken the law by living in the US without proper documentation, I feel that the influx of illegal immigrants (especially from Central American) during the 1980s and 1990s can be traced to misplaced American foreign policies. From Harry Truman’s containment to Condoleezza Rice’s defense of the Democratic Peace Theory, the United States has frequently tried to have some say in the governments of the world. However, I feel that Americans should not be surprised that there are so many illegal immigrants in the United States because failed foreign endeavors have stalled the progress of political institutions in Latin America. The civil wars of Guatemala and El Salvador serve as examples to failed American intervention. When political institutions fail in their purpose, then people look to the United States despite persecution. The DREAM Act offers some future at least to the children who had to experience hectic lives in search of a better existence. To think that the DREAM Act is just a handout paid for by taxes on citizens for the benefit of illegal immigrants is ignorance. I would definitely encourage further research on the DREAM act (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/12/01/get-facts-dream-act)
Trends of US Foreign Policy:
Ever since Stalin began taking control of Eastern Europe after World War II, the United States took the mission to stall the spread of communism around the world. This became known as the foreign policy term as “Containment.” President Truman solidified the idea of containment through the formation of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), to serve as an intergovernmental military alliance to fight against an external party (the Soviet Union). Containment has led through most of the United States’ military operations: the Korean War in the 1950s, the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s, and involvement in Afghanistan during the 1980s. These major military operations were concentrated in areas where the Soviet Union could have a direct influence, or where the Soviet Union could initiate an operation. However, any involvement in Latin America would have to be discrete as to not start a “red scare” à la Cuban Missile Crisis. Cuba stood as an obvious target to watch since it was outright communist. Nonetheless, the risk of having any other Latin American country, considering the proximity to the United States, become communist could be detrimental to the United States. In contrast to any missions outside the Americas, American involvement had to be subtle as to not cause alarm. Much of the involvement followed the idea that if Latin America were democratic, then these states would be friendly to the United States. The “Democratic Peace Theory” states that democracies, for some detail in their definition, rarely or never go to war with one another. These policies garnered different effects in Latin America and the Latin American population of the United States.
US involvement in Guatemala:
In a piece on the CIA website, David M. Barrett states that early on in the cold war the United States congress could give strong support for covert operations without many people knowing[1]. In 1944, a revolution commenced in Guatemala where Dictator Jorge Ubico was overthrown in favor of a democracy. A civilian president named Juan Jose Arevalo was soon elected. However, the men who took charge in Guatemala created a leftist regime, thus putting the United States on its toes. One must remember that the government in Guatemala had been “elected” and not at all forced upon. Nonetheless, the principles of Guatemala’s democracy still bothered the United States, who could not stand any form or sign of communism so close to home. Guatemala’s final stand before American intervention came when US-corporations, such as the United Fruit Company, could not escape the Guatemalan government’s land expropriation. Soon, Guatemala bought Soviet armaments from Czechoslovakia and the United States could no longer watch idly. In the eyes of the CIA, Guatemala had turned “red.”The target became Jacobo Arbenz, Arevalo’s successor. In May and June of 1954, the US used to CIA to easily overthrow Guatemala’s government. The US kept quiet. Though the initial coup of 1954 was seen as a success, as more repressive regimes abdicated the leadership position in Guatemala for the ensuing five decades, the intervention was seen as a failure. The CIA had trained a select number of rebels to issue an attack on the head of state. Once victory had been won, a military leadership took over the Guatemalan government.
US involvement in El Salvador:
El Salvador had been a nation of class struggles since the early 1880s. Coffee was the main cash crop of the country accounting for 95% of the nation’s income in the hands of 2% of the population. The great economic class disparity led to the creation of the Central American Socialist Party which pitted peasants against the government. The government established death squads in response to kill anyone who wanted to cross the government. By 1979, the power struggle between the government and the peasants had reached its zenith. The five main guerilla groups in El Salvador united to become the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (or FMLN) in order to combat to government, and thus the civil war commenced. In order to combat this leftist uprising, the United States government offered much military aid in forms of weapons and money. Like Guatemala, the United States could not risk having a communist nation so close to home while fighting Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. However, the Salvadoran military’s force against the guerillas and the people of El Salvador put US involvement and issues of human rights into question. The murder of Archbishop Romero (now a Martyr for the El Salvadoran people’s cause) is still used as an example of the military’s cruelty. Calling for the US to stop sending aid to the Salvadoran military, Archbishop Romero was shot through the heart while celebrating mass. A peace deal was finally reached in 1992, but at the cost of about an estimated 70,000 casualties involving women, children and clergy.
Illegal Immigrants in the US:
It comes down to this point in the end: Do you really blame so many Latin Americans for fleeing to the United States? They evade massacres and unfair governments in favor of persecution, but with at least some hope of survival. Many of these countries were taking the steps that would make democracy work for their respective peoples. Instead, the US used its influence to make a government accountable to the US, not to the people. Unfortunately, democracy cannot exist unless it is accountable to its own people. We must remember that democracy did not happen overnight in the United States either. African-Americans did not get the right to vote until the latter part of the 19th century and laws barring their ability to vote were not abolished until 1965, and women could not vote until the 19th amendment was passed in 1920. Democracy needs time to evolve for the specific needs and solutions of its particular state. There are many illegal immigrants in the United States because American foreign policy has given the people a reason to illegally immigrate to the United States. In the course of creating a pro-American regime in Central America, the United States has created a juxtaposition of an efficient (for the most part) democratic government adjacent to inefficient, tyrannical governments in the Americas. Without a working government and without a stable opportunity of advancement, a journey to the United States becomes the only viable option. Now, the Dream Act does not provide a solution to the problem of illegal immigration, but it does give an avenue for individuals who actually want to benefit the United States in some way. The United States has always been the haven for opportunity and intellectualism, and it has not changed now. If individuals are opt to die for this country or to dedicate themselves to provide solutions, then maybe we should garner this chance to let them prove their ambition. Also, the people who benefit from this the most are the children of the parents who experienced the broken governments and massacres. As for the broken governments left behind in the wake of mismanaged foreign policy and efforts, it will just take time and the will of the people to repair their institutions.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment