The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relation, Volume II, The American Search for Opportunity, written by Walter LaFeber is in my view an instructional and fascinating book that describes the trajectory of the United States foreign relations between the years 1865-1913 when Americans developed foreign policies aiming to open and expand new commercial opportunities in order to create better conditions for the development of the national economy that resulted in the emergency of the United States as a new global power. As this unfolds, instead of promotion of order, liberty and stability abroad, the American foreign policy had unsettling impact in the international affairs. The Second Industrial Revolution was a determinant factor in the development of the American economic growth. Cultural ideals of isolationism, exceptionalism, and racism (white supremacy) shaped the foreign policy. It was during these years that the United States understood the importance of being able to protect commerce by creating an efficient maritime force, which was used to interfere during clashes in the quest for obtaining new markets in the Pacific Ocean, Africa and in Latin America and suppressing nationalist sentiments in the regions. According to LaFerber, the American Executive power was transformed into an imperial presidency with unprecedented ability to use force bypassing Congress approval in other to maintain American interest of increasing its commercial power. It is in analyzing these policies that we are able to better understand current United States foreign relations and come to the conclusion that these fundamental values are still shaping American foreign policy.
LaFeber gives much importance to the Second Industrial Revolution and the redesigned productive system, revealing that it was due to its occurrence that the U.S. became an emergent global power. “From the 1890s on, the nation had emerged as the world’s greatest and most competitive player in the marketplace. Fearful Europeans warned of an “American Invasion” an overwhelming offensive of United States-made goods and multinationals long before they worried about challenges of United States military, political, or cultural power”(Page 21). It was because of the development of a new capitalism and its need for foreign markets that many revolutions were not only supported but sometimes instigated by the United States leadership envisioning enhancement of commercial opportunities. Hypocritically, when ideals of liberty, stability and order ingrained in the Constitution clashed with the quest of profit and market share, the latter usually prevailed in the discernment of the United States action. The restoration of order was only emphasized if opportunity could be first pursued. “Neither Seward nor any other official could ever discover how to extract extensive concessions from weaker nations without ultimately undermining the order, if not sovereignty, of that nation” (Page 19). This proves LaFeber’s disagreeing with the notion that the United States foreign policy is portrayed by many scholars as to aim for order and stability. Isolationism did not mean that the United States would distant themselves of the political activities of the entire world. American isolation was only practiced in the political activities of Europe because Americans understood European foreign policy as intrinsically bad, corrupt and colonialist. “The Unite States did not want to join the European and Japanese quest for landed, colonial empire. American officials wanted only scattered, relatively small areas of land to serve as bases for their necessary commercial expansionism.” (Page 238) With Europe, the United States concentrated on commercial relations distancing itself from political intervention in order not to risk its sovereignty and autonomy. Everywhere else, interventionism, which maintained the United States emergent economic power, was justified by the quest of new commercial opportunities and the exercise of the exceptionalism. The latter was the believe that the United States had a messianic mission (Manifest Destiny) to provide the possibility for the New World to have a better and just political system disseminating democracy, liberty and Christian values. When dealing with Asia, Africa and Latin America, the United States was very much involved in their politics as LaFeber described “American policy played some role in all revolutionary outbreaks (in Russia, China, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, Philippines, Panama, El Salvador, Hawaii and many others) and in most it was a determinative force” ( Page 234). “From Seward to Hay, the United States officials had not hesitated to use bullets when dollars proved inadequate” (Page 216).
Expansionism (secular and religious) was perceived as condition for security and prosperity of the American republic and thus we saw continuous territorial growth of the state. From the initial colonies of the Atlantic east to the conquest of the West continental state and later the “informal” imperial power with the annexation of the Philippines and defeat of Spain in the Cuban independence war. The expansion of the boarders proved that the United States commercial relations had to increase continuously, reaching nations in faraway lands. It was when the United States feared that European nations (Germany, England and France) were going to close his commercial trade with China, that the Open Door policy was created insisting that all countries were to be given equal rights and possibilities throughout the world. China was forced to agree with the trade policies of the U.S. On the other hand, Central and South America was understood to be part of the New World (under the Monroe Doctrine) and a vital strategic position with importance in order to maintain the security of American interests. As soon as the United States felt threatened in the international commercial system, it entered into action using force if necessary in order to defend its interest and thus implementing its interventionist policies. The construction of the Panama Canal is an example as LaFeber states “the canal is the most important subject now connected with commercial growth and progress of the United States…the United States helped trigger a revolt and used the resulting disorder to obtain land for the canal” (Page 74). Missionary groups played a major role in expansion that ultimately influenced the destabilization of East Asia together with the imports of foreign goods.
Another fact that made public acceptance of intervention acceptable was racism. It was usually combined with white paternalistic supremacy. During the intervention in the Philippines, LaFeber stated “ the United States government had shown it could keep African Americans and Indians (and women) in their place at home without the vote, it could do the same with Filipinos” (Page 163). It was part of the culture in America (exemplify in its treatment of native Americans and the segregation of Africa Americans even after emancipation) and it reflected in the United States foreign policy “The consolidation of the continent, training of military force, contradictory feelings about immigrants, and above all, racism not only characterized these late nineteenth-century decades but were central in shaping U.S. foreign policy then and in the new century” (Page 45). Americans had not problem to the annexation of Canada because of the same Anglo-Saxon race, but were not so thrilled to combine the “creoles” of the South into the white nation. The people of the South were better controlled, but not annexed to the Union.
Another important development that came from these years was the appearance of a very strong presidency. LaFeber detailed the nearly open-ended power of post -1898 presidency, as described by the Supreme Court in Inre Neagle “the president’s power was not limited to carrying out Congress’s wishes but extended to enforcing the rights, duties, and obligations growing out of the Constitution itself, our international relations, and all the protection implied by nature of the government under the Constitution” (Page 82). This proved to be right when presidents used military force when it was necessary to preserve and defend American opportunity. “The changing interrelationships of business and foreign policy began to change as well the balance of power within the U.S. governmental system” (Page 42). “Expansion and disorder abroad equaled centralization at home” (Page 177).
In conclusion, LaFeber account of the Foreign Policies in the late nineteen century and beginning of twenty century was very informative explaining in details American ambition in becoming a successful world power and the role of American leadership who took advantage of Europe declining economic situation and independency revolutions throughout the world to expand its commercial aspirations. I would say that this ambition as LaFeber portrayed would go far against fundamental principles proclaimed by the Founding Fathers of America being the beacon of liberty, democracy and justice for all humanity.
LaFeber in my view neglected to develop other factors involving the American Expansionism. It concentrated mostly on the quest for business and commercial trade but barely noticed any other reasons for drive to expansion providing a narrow and homogenic view. He could have developed the concept of America’s cultural imperialism as an ideology and geographic strategic aspirations not tied to commercial trade.
Notes:
- LaFeber, Walter The Cambridge History of American Relations, Volume II The American Search for Opportunity, 1865-1913 (Cambridge University Press – 1993)
No comments:
Post a Comment