What does the History of U.S. – Latin American Relations Really Tell Us?
Eric Sype is a full-time graduate student in UC Berkeley’s Master of Development Practice program.
Over the past few years, Latin America has seen a wave of political uprisings. After a year of protests, the Chilean people have successfully voted to write a new constitution. Last year, indigenous peoples of Ecuador organized a massive movement to demand their voices be heard when austerity measures were put in place that would disproportionately and negatively impact indigenous communities. Since the Spring of 2018, the people of Nicaragua have continued to push for accountability and justice for human rights violations perpetuated by the state. Most recently, the Peruvian people took to the streets in force to demand justice after congress pushed out their sitting, democratically elected, president.
With each of these events, I have heard many U.S. citizens ask the question: “What should the United States be doing about this?”. The question seems to come from an honest place of best intentions, but implicit in this question is the assumption that the United States needs to do something. At its core, this assumption is imperialistic and blindly accepting of U.S. hegemony. Before asking what the U.S. should do, I would encourage my fellow U.S. citizens to know and understand what our government has already done throughout Latin America for over a century.
U.S – Latin American relations have always been categorized by an imbalance of power. In 1823, the U.S. used the Monroe Doctrine to signal to the rest of the world that Latin America was under its sphere of influence. However, this was during a pivotal time, when many European colonial projects in the Americas were coming to an end. Eduardo Galeano’s Open Veins of Latin America, and Jose Martí’s Nuestra America painfully detail centuries of oppression and extraction throughout the region, and when European control was finally coming to an end, the U.S. decided it was our turn. Moving into the 20th century, it is hard to find an example of U.S. intervention or action in the region that was not a continuation of the self-interested, extractive, past. Perhaps the worst era of recent history was that of the Cold War. In places like Guatemala and El Salvador, the U.S. backed militaristic, authoritarian regimes, while pouring billions of dollars into military aid used to massacre civilian populations. In places like Argentina and Chile, the U.S. supported military leaders in overthrowing democratically elected governments. This led to terror and persecution in both countries for decades. During this time, 30,000 Argentinians were forcibly disappeared, never to be seen by their loved ones again. These are just a few of the many egregious ways in which the U.S. has actively participated in the oppression of Latin America. If this history surprises you, learn more! Greg Grandin’s Empire’s Workshop: Latin America, The United States, and the Rise of the New Imperialism is a great place to start.
Understanding this history brings into question what moral authority, if any, the U.S. has on a global stage. The U.S. continues to portray itself as a beacon of justice, and democracy, but the history books that are used in our educational system hide anything that might put this into question. Whenever there is an internationally recognized struggle for freedom, we are conditioned to believe the U.S. can and should help. However, that assumption is built on a lie that the U.S. has always acted as a “good neighbor”, to support freedom. The impulse to push for the U.S. to engage is also founded in the idea that U.S. intervention is the key to facilitating positive change around the world. This is a dangerous idea, that history has shown to lead to colonialist actions.
So, when returning to the question of: “What should the United States be doing about this?”, I think there are some obvious places to start. First, the U.S. government should publicly acknowledge its historic role in the oppression and persecution of peoples across Latin America. In doing this, there is no way to deny that the U.S. played an integral role in creating the root causes of violence and poverty that are still forcing Central Americans to flee from their homes. With that in mind, our immigration policies should reflect our culpability in the situation, as well as the humanity of those arriving at the border. As powerful drug cartels wreak havoc over many communities in the region, we might also take more responsibility for the demand for drugs that our country’s consumption has created. However, what is most important is that we look to the people of Latin America to guide our actions. If we do not listen to the people, then our actions will continue to be paternalistic in nature, and the last thing Latin America needs is for the United States to continue telling them what to do.