The Monroe Doctrine Of The United States And Protectionism

The monroe doctrine of the United States and protectionism

Introduction

In this work we will announce important data and a rigorous analysis of the monroe doctrine of the United States, which allow the reader to enter the strategic context of this doctrine and its relationship with Latin American countries, main actors of this document.

The Monroe doctrine was presented by President James Monroe in his annual speech to Congress in 1823. Essentially its author was, John Quincy Adams, who served as Secretary of State during his term, wrote the doctrine as a proclamation to the opposition of the United States to European colonialism.

One of the interesting aspects is that from the day of its pronouncement, the doctrine has been reinterpreted and extended in various ways to adapt to the current situation and times that the United States lives, such is the case of the corollary of President Theodore Roosevelt, manyYears later, the first pronouncement of the Monroe doctrine.

This is why it is important.

Developing

Historic context

President James Monroe 1823 (anticolonialism)

In his speech of December 2, 1823, President James Monroe, referred to having turned instructions to the minister who was in Russia specifically in St. Petersburg, to make that country see that country over the countries of the American continent, which were foundIn condition of being free and independent. Which should no longer be considered by Europe to be colonized on a future occasion.

Of that account, friendly invited this power to respect the countries of the American continent, of which the United States is ensuring peace and well -being, freedom and happiness of these. He emphasized the same as the wars that were developing in Europe in Europe, he was not going to take part, they could only conflict when their rights were threatened, taking into account the political system that Europe was developing which was totally differentto which in the Americas was lived, which had been consecrated through struggles, losses of lives and wealth, which had had maturity in their thoughts and in the way of carrying their governments. They were entrusted to respect together with Spain, the independence of the states that had already achieved it in America and that the position would defend before any other power in Europe that tried to colonize them.

Within the last events between Spain and Portugal it was announced that Europe had not reassured, but the United States would remain out of these conflicts, and taking into account that if a country in America will become part of some European powerI would not do it voluntarily, but by force as could happen with the countries of the South in Latin America, which would not allow it.

Monroe 1901 doctrine and the club’s policy

This policy called Big Stick, for its acronym in English was a phrase taken by the president of the United States Theodore Roosevelt, in the year of 1900, where he made reference to “speak softly, but he carries a club, so you would go far”, thePresident Roosevelt, began this year to the political domain of the United States over mainly Latin American countries, taking as an excuse that everything would be in welfare of US citizens, starting in the countries of the Caribbean Sea, marking the beginning of imperialism over Latin America.

If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and with the sense of conveniences in social and political matters, if it maintains order and respects its obligations, it does not have to fear an intervention from the United States. Chronic injustice or the importance of a general relaxation of the rules of a civilized society may demand that, consequently, in America or outside it, the intervention of a civilized nation and, in the western hemisphere, the adhesion of theThe United States to Monroe doctrine can force the United States, although against their wishes, in flagrant cases of injustice or helplessness, to exercise an international police power. (UGALDE, 2005)

 The Roosevelt corollary to the Monroe doctrine

This corollary is the amendment made by President Roosevelt to the Monroe doctrine, where Latin America and the Caribbean would be considered as territory to expand all commercial, political interests and mainly on their resources for the benefit of the United States, and that, if, ifSome power in Europe would like to intervene, they would act to get them out of the continent. This corollary was given on December 6, 1904, before the United States Congress before an eminent threat of European powers such as: Germany, England and Italy. These had threatened Venezuela with a naval blockade at that time, and taking advantage, that the president had done this amendment, pressure on these countries would be exerted to give up blocking Venezuela for a debt that had this countries. All this, always under the same theory that the United States exercised dominion over the countries of the continent to maintain the peace and freedom of these countries, which was not seen with very good eyes by the powers of Europe.

Good neighbor’s policy:

This is an eminently political, diplomatic and commercial movement, which refers to an integration of the countries of the American region, which consists in having a better relationship between countries and their neighbors. This in order to obtain the cordial cooperation of each of these, without taking into account their interests. It began with the release of commercial exchange between all countries from the United States to Argentina, which did not occur, but if there were several achievements in different areas such health, creating the Pan American Health Organization, the Pan American Institute of Geography andHistory, the Institute for Child Protection, the Inter -American Commission of Women, Inter -American Indigenous Institute, in agriculture with the creation of the Inter -American Institute of Agricultural Sciences, the creation of the Treaty of Inter -American Assistance Inter -Current, the creation of the Inter -American Development Bankand the Pan American Sports Organization, not letting the agreements with oil between countries and the creation of the OAS.

OAS Creation:

This is a regional Pan American organization, which was created on April 30, 1948, under the precepts of maintaining peace, security and consolidating democracy, as well as the preservation of all the rights of member countries and promoting rightshumans, likewise this organization within its main functions is to support social development within its countries.

In 1962 the Republic of Cuba de la OAS was expelled. For the adhesion of this to Marxism-Leninism, which was against the Inter-American System of Governments, being on June 3, 2009 at the General Assembly of the OAS, where the 1962 resolution of the suspension of this country was repealed, takingin account to be able to constitute it again to the organization. Being able to mention in the same way the suspension of Honduras before this organization for the coup d’etat of 2009 when they sent President Manuel Zelaya in exile, voluntarily withdrawing from the organization. However, the OAS does not take this decision into account for not recognizing said government by reincorporating on June 1, 2011.

 Progress Alliance for Latin America:

Promoted by Jhon F. Kennedy, on the implementation of progressive formulas, approach to Fidel Castro and the eventual withdrawal of the US Vietnam troops and the promotion of civil rights for blacks.

Main actors

1.  The Monroe doctrine was a document pronounced by the president of the United States of America, James Monroe on December 2, 1823, in this speech many approaches concerning the political situation of the United States of America were raised, hence thewhich would be established as the Gospel of American foreign policy.
2.  In this document, the tools against European interventions were reflected was made up of President W. Wilson in article 21 of the Pact of the Society of Nations in 1919, which caused the departure of several Latin American republics which at that time were less dependent on the United States of America.
3.  In July 1960, the Monroe doctrine was subject to controversy between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republicmention that the Monroe doctrine, without any scruple proclaimed the law of the United States to exercise in Latin America international police functions and to interfere in the internal affairs of the countries of Latin America
4.  The results of the application of the Monroe doctrine were noted between 1880 and 1914 time in which Great Britain was losing supremacy in Latin America and the United States expanded its penetration into the Caribbean and Hispanic-America, ends with the imposition of the interoceanic channel inPanama in 1914.
5.  Finally, the application of the effects of the Monroe doctrine is felt in Latin America when President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, were responsible for deepening the US intervention in Latin America with the financing and unrestricted support to the regimesTotalitarian right -wing, coup d’ets, left -wing political leaders murders and the application of the Cóndor Plan.

Purposes

The Monroe doctrine was exposed as a clear message to the Congress of the US Republic. UU., on December 2, 1823, where after this could be defined three purposes of the creation of this doctrine being the following:

‘European powers have no right to intervene in the internal affairs of American States”

The purpose of this principle was to send the message to the European Community in the face of its constant desire to colonize, conquer and create states related to their interests, said message with its forcefulness urges to prevent European states from being subject to the innate desire of the countries of the countries of theOld continent of colonizing states away from its territory in order to acquire and use the resources found in the states conquered or colonized, given the growing economy and development of the United States, it was evident that European countries such as England, Spain, France and Portugal, among others, could use their colonizing methods to wantfrom Paris, thus separating from the kingdom of Great Britain.

"Any intervention of this class (intervention in internal matters) is considered as a hostile threat and a danger to the United States"

According to the description of the second principle which aims to send a warning regarding the relations and internal administration of the United States, where absolute independence reiterates, including international law issues, also considering that any attempt to carry out any intervention or interventionIn affairs of the United States by European countries, including limiting European states to celebrate treaties between them, referring to all the great communication routes that are open to date in America, knowing commercial interest and universal communication understanding the interest.that the world powers had and have on these large channels of air, maritime and land communication, consisting in extreme case the rejection of the United States to recognize treaties between countries of the European continent.

"The colonies foundation in America is inadmissible because the entire American content between civilized states has already been distributed"

With this third principle the purpose of the US in its monroe doctrine is to send the message to the European powers that must recognize and respect that the American continent is found with its totally defined, independent and own political administration states, this principle goesalso aimed to prevent the colonizing spirit from entering the American continent by any of the countries that had proclaimed its independence and that could be the object of becoming colonies of the European powers, since this object of colonization could be affected as a dominant effect and arriveto put the independence of the US at risk.

It is evident that with the third principle the US sought to disseminate the supremacy they exercise in the American continent, which has been seen over time even against the same monroe doctrine as is one of the most obvious cases the case of the channel of the channelPanama, the interference that USA had in the war between Chile and Peru, where Chile obtained victory and the US did not allow the war winning country to annex the Peruvian territory that was in dispute, giving or understanding that this principle isconsidered rather as "America for the North Americans". (Dallanegra, 1994)

The Monroe doctrine from its promulgation before the US Congress to date is in force, part of it was the awakening the spirit of nationalism to the inhabitants of that country as well as framing and sending the message of the external politics, whichThe US was promoting, promulgating and practicing towards European powers, also starting with hegemony in the American continent until this date.

Analysis

The Genesis of Monroe Doctrine

He has three fundamental ideas that supported his creation, development and transformation or degeneration of the true feeling of his original idea. The first motor idea was born when in 1630 with the arrival of the first British settlers. They were occupying the American native peoples, they did not have a justification to invade the land and then that Puritan Minister Jhon Colton established as an ideology that: the American people received from God the mission of spreading the principles of freedom and democracy from the world, aboutwhich is based on the independence of the United States in the year of 1776. All this is called "manifest destiny" and that is why the Congress of that time established as nation motto "In God We Trust" which means in God I trust. And how not to trust God according to them, if God is the one who is giving them the mission of occupying Latin American peoples at the beginning and then the world, but in reality this was only a facade for the expansionist ideas that Americans had since their independence from their independence.

The second motor idea was the creation of the doctrine by John Quincy Adams and implemented in the discourse taught in 1823 by the president of the United States James Monroe, who intended to convey the desire that the American continent did not submitmore to European colonialism and to counteract the declaration of the Russians by the Tsar on the rights of the Pacific coast from Alaska to the 51st parallel. But the true intention was to legitimize with the approval of Congress and the approval of American citizens, the influence of Americans throughout the American continent and break the structures of monarchical governments of European origin, with the new principles of freedom and democracy. With this ideology "America for the Americans", Latin American peoples believed that America was of the same governments, but in reality it was quite the opposite, to create a continental level, an American world power. (Dallanegra, 1994)

The third motor idea was the corollary of Theodore Roosevelt, being a total alteration to the Monroe doctrine, considering all of Latin America and the Caribbean as territories to expand the commercial interests of the United States, doing this through its well -known club of the club and its subsequentDolk of the dollar. Both policies were the natural response to the enormous difference in development between the United States and Latin American countries, Roosevelt considered the need to assemble the United States militarily to counteract European threats and put in order the Latin American republics, which were unstable, were unstable,And especially for the millionaire investments that Americans were doing in these villages, because thus evading large amounts of taxes.

We can conclude, what the monroe doctrine of merely political issues was transformed to economic and military issues, and as the Roosevelt corollary to the Monroe doctrine allowed the United States of America, between 1823 and 1914 to achieve the separation of Great Britain whoIn turn, they were losing supremacy in Latin America and the United States themselves.

Evolution of Monroe doctrine

At the end of World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union emerged as the two world powers, “to face the new international scenario, the United States developed the Truman doctrine of 1948, which consisted of facilitating financial and logistical support to all those countriesthat will be distanced from communist influence ". Likewise, the Truman Administration established the containment policy that consisted of the disproportionate growth of nuclear military capacity with the objective of neutralizing Soviet expansion and limiting its area of influence to the territories that already dominated or had influences. (Hormoeche, 2001)

“President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, were responsible for deepening the American intervention in Latin America with the financing and unrestricted support to the totalitarian right -wing regimes, coup d’etats, murders of left -wing political leaders and the applicationof the Condor Plan.”(Hormaeche, 2001)

After the Cold War, the United States of America found another element of interventionism that would allow him. The United States would be responsible for countries committed to terrorism, including those who give refuge to terrorists. Although this policy was conceived by the Neoconservative Bush Administration Lodge on the basis of ideas and projects that have been continuing since 1992, this claim called “Bush Doctrine” is justified under the pretext of the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 and remainsto the present day. (Danglades, 2003)

conclusion

From the colonization of the United States in the year of 1630 to the present, they are firm the manifest destiny that God chose Americans to proclaim the principles of freedom and democracy in the world and as bipolarity between colonialism versus neocolonialism, American versus versusRussians, capitalism versus socialism, has allowed AmericansToday being a world hegemonic power. That in reality, it is the only and true interest of the Americans since its foundation, so it will be very difficult especially for Latin America, to get out of these totalitarian and manipulative currents, which the least proclaiming is the self-determination of their own nations.

Bibliography

1. Danglades, a. (2003). The Busch doctrine and the third coup d’etat.
2. Dallanegra, l. (1994). Political relations between the United States and Latin America: Monroista predominance or American unit? Buenos Aires, Argentina.
3. Fernández Martín, R. (2006). Philosophy in Spanish. Obtained from philosophy.Org: http: // www.philosophy.Org/Ave/001/A264.htm
4. Hormaeche, l. D. (2001). War, Empire and Cultures: The United States in the world context. Argentina: University of La Pampa.
5. SHMOOP EDITORIAL TEAM. (November 11, 2008). Monroe Doctrine Summary. Obtained from Shmoop University: https: // www.SHMOOP.com/Historical-Texts/Monroe-Dotrine/Summary.HTML
6. Organization of American State. (2019). The Monroe Doctrine. Obtained from Virtual Library of Inter American Peace Initiatives: https: // www.OAS.Org/SAP/Peacefund/Virtuallibary/MonroedoCtrine/Treaty/Monroedoctrine.PDF
7. Ugalde, l. (2005). Gomecism and the Pan American Policy of the United States . Caracas: Andrés Catholic University.
8. Torrealba, a. (2004). Monroe doctrine, current repercussions of this controversial foreign policy. Madrid.