It is easy to think imperialism is a thing of the past.
Manifest Destiny, the Louisiana Purchase, or the Mexican Cession: all things we
learned about in history class that happened long ago. Presented simply as
Western Expansion; we did it, we have it, it is over with. Countries
(particularly the United States) no longer aspire to obtain more land and
expand their national boarders, but this idea of imperialism is outdated.
Imperialism doesn’t present itself in this clear cut form anymore. Today
imperialism manifests itself under a disguise: “humanitarianism”. Though
countries no longer quest to expand physically they want to gain subtle and
even not so subtle control over resource; resources such as oil, minerals,
metals, diamonds, and even newer and cheaper labor forces. All to support the
massive machine that is consumerism and therefore the economy. Once the “developing” world decided that they
had reached their max capacity of expansionism, the rules of the game changed.
It was no longer a matter of invasion and take over, but rather subtle coercion
and control. We will support you (brutal dictator or not) as long as you
implement economic policies and play the game under our terms; if not we will
crush you.
As
Howard Zinn touched on in this article Empire
or Humanity, he himself if a WWII veteran and claims guilt of his naïve
idea of what the war he fought in was really
about. This is true even today; the United States has been waging a war against
‘terrorism’ for eleven years now. As an American citizen myself, having had two
brothers in the military; I never questioned the legitimacy of our war in the
Middle East as imperialism, like the majority of U.S. citizens and solders of
WWII did not. As Zinn put it very clearly,
In
wars, there is always a difference between the motives of the soldiers and the
motives of the political leaders who send them into battle. It was to defend
fascism and create a more decent world, free of aggression, militarism, and
racism.
In the case of the
Middle East, we invaded Iraq under the pretenses of finding weapons, and now Afghanistan claiming to be saving the
Afghani people from a brutal leader. The truth of the matter is the United
States does not care; our intentions are anything but innocent humanitarian
intervention. We interfered in Afghanistan to “implement a democracy”, yet in
the case of Rwanda for example Clinton (after once publicly calling it
genocide) would not declare Rwanda a genocide. Therefore, allowing the U.S (and
the UN) not to intervene. The slaughtering of the Rwandan people does not
affect the United States economy; so we had no reason to intervene. However, in
the case of Afghanistan and the Middle East we use the mask of
“humanitarianism” but I think our intentions are clear; we control
Afghanistan—we control oil.
The
policies that the U.S implemented all throughout Latin America from the
nineteen-sixties up until now have had directly negative effects on the nearly
entire region. For example the United States has been interfering and
intervening in Nicaragua since 1909. From that point on the U.S is spotted
throughout Nicaraguan history with its’ military occupations in the country. Not
intervening against the government, but rather supporting and providing
financial and military aid to the brutal Samoza dictatorship; because the
Samoza’s played the economic game that benefited the United States. The United
States did not care that they were directly funding one of Latin Americas most
brutal dictator; because they got what they wanted out of it. The central ideas
of the Roosevelt Corollary demonstrate clearly what the intention of the United
Sates was and arguably still is—even if you have to read a little bit between
the lines. “If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable
efficiency and decency in social political matters, if it keeps order and pays
is obligations, it need fear no interference from the United States.” However,
Chronic
wrong-doing or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of
civil society, may in America as elsewhere, ultimately require intervention by
some civilized nation, and in the Western Hemisphere the adherence of the
United States to the Monroe Doctrine may force the United States, however
reluctantly, in flagrant cases of such wrongdoing or impotence, to the exercise
of an international police power. …Our interests and those of our southern
neighbors are in reality identical. They have great natural riches, and if
within their borders the reign of law and justice obtains, prosperity is sure
to come to them. While they thus obey the primary laws of the civilized society
they may rest assured that they will be treated by us in a spirit of cordial
and helpful sympathy. We would interfere with them only in the last resort, and
then only if it became evident that their inability or unwillingness to do
justice at home and abroad had violated the rights
of the United States or had invited foreign aggression to the detriment of
the entire body of American nations.
This passage from the
Roosevelt Corollary demonstrates the intentions of the United States with its
“southern neighbors” perfectly; we will not intervene as long as you let us do
what we see fit to benefit our economy by exploiting your resources. This is
the general approach that the United States still uses to approach particularly
Latin America but the rest of the world as well.
United States
feels the right to “exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for
such purposes as we see fit, and by such means as we see fit” (Henry Luce). These
Neo-Liberal, Capitalistic policies have never been more clearly demonstrated to
me as in Central America. The United States during the time of the Revolution
in the late eighties in Nicaragua funded the Contra War; because the
Sandanistas were seen as a communist threat to their power. The United States
gave millions and millions of dollars to put down the revolution; they were
unsuccessful. Now thirty years later the United Sates has a seemingly decent
relationship with the very government they were trying to put down in the
seventies. One might ask why that is, but the answer is simple. Even though
Ortega outright denounces the United States and talks of anti-U.S policy, he
does everything the United States asks of him. The Free Trade Zone in Managua
is a perfect example of his compliance.
Walking down the streets of San Salvador the thought of
imperialism couldn’t have been more prevalent. With Mc Donald’s, Quiznos, Pizza
Hut, Subway, KFC’s and Wal-Mart lining the streets and the dollarization of the
Salvadoran economy, the connection between the U.S and El Salvador could not be
clearer. The United States does not need to expand its territorial boarders and
make El Salvador “its own”, because it doesn’t have to. As long as El Salvador
allows neo-liberal policies that allow for the entrance and growth of
multinational cooperation’s without any barriers; the U.S in affect controls El
Salvador. We are going to come in, use you land, steal business from you
people, use your resources, pollute your water and air; but we are creating
jobs so you will accept it. If not
the U.S will, “exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such
purposes as we see fit, and by such means as we see fit”.
One
could look just a few years back into history and see how the United States
funded the Guatemalan and Salvadoran militaries to slaughter their own people. The
U.S funding of these wars could not be further from humanitarianism. During the
eighties the Regan Administration funneled 1.5 million dollars a day to the Salvadoran
military; in the name of fighting communism.
In Guatemala the civil war that the U.S waged on the Guatemalan peoples
accused of communism, raged on for thirty six years and left two hundred
thousand innocent men, women and children dead. Not to mention the deadly games
that the U.S government played to insure Europe would not construct a
Nicaraguan Canal instead of the P anama Canal. More recently we can look at the
signing of CAFTA in 2005; the policies that were enacted under CAFTA did not
benefit Central America, they only benefited the big business, multinational
cooperation’s.
The
situation facing Central America, particularly Nicaragua is a very complicated
one. Though they are their own sovereign states, they are so intermittingly
involved with the United States and its unfair policies they are on a path to
the seemly unknown, but deadly. Imperialism today presents itself as humanitarian
intervention, and is ridden with capitalism and neo-liberalism. As the question was posed in class, “Is it
possible for the United States to have a real human rights foreign policy”?
.jpg)
