Julia Wuestefeld Grade 12 How did the policies and actions of later U.S.

presidents (Kennedy to Clinton) reflect change and continuity from the policies and actions of their predecessors? Use as examples at least two different countries in two different regions of Latin America/Asia-Pacific, 1898-2000. Wednesday March 16th, 2010 Word Count: 1146 Policies and actions of United States presidents have greatly impacted Latin American countries through history. However, with different changes in ideology, the types of policies and actions taken by the presidents also changes, affecting Latin American countries differently. The policies and actions of later U.S. presidents mirror the actions of early 20th century president, rather than the ones after the Great Depression, reflecting both continuity and change from the policies and actions of their predecessors. The actions of the later presidents are very comparable to those that occurred before the depression, displaying continuity in ideology. However, there is a change in policies compared to the ones issued after the depression, presenting change. There is continuity in the policies and actions of the United States presidents regarding Latin America; the actions taken place after 1961 reflect those that occur before the Great Depression. In the early 20th century the US made much use of what was known as Gunboat Diplomacy. The US would send their navy to settle any unrest in Latin American countries that would disrupt their investments in the countries. Since their investments consisted basically of agricultural commodities and mineral and oil extraction, it was very susceptible to political uprisings. In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson sent marines into the Dominican Republic because the country did not sanction US control of its border affairs. The US Navy took over the government and ran a dictatorship until 1924. Then, they established a puppet dictator, Rafael Trujillo, to run the country under US intervention. Similarly, in 1961 President J.F. Kennedy - following the same ideology as Linden Johnson made use of military intervention in order to establish tranquility in the country. He feared a revolution through Latin America similar to that of Cuba and wanted to maintain friendly capitalist regimes (Keen and Haynes, 561) in the area. In order to do so, he established the Alliance for Progress, which stated that the US would spend $10 billion on the region. Latin American countries had to institute programs of political and social reform. The American government also

sought to strengthen the military forces of the region in counterinsurgency tactics. This resulted neither in economic development or democracy. This only led to the expansion of US trade and investments through capitalist investments. Following Kennedys example, Johnson worried about the establishment of another socialist state - similar to Cuba - in the Dominican Republic. He used the marines to suppress rebellions. However, it seems to be the case that his main concern was to assure Dominican sugar production for American industries. In fact, most of his advisers had ties to the sugar economy. Thus, the enforcement of capitalism in the Dominican Republic can be seen as a faade, created in order to establish a government that would comply with American interests. This is comparable to Wilsons use of the Navy in 1916 to establish a rule within the country that would fulfill US needs. However, there is also change in the policies and actions of the United States presidents regarding Latin America; the actions taken place after 1961 are very different from those that occur after the Great Depression. After the Great Depression, during the 1930s, US policies changed, refraining from military intervention. The Clark Memorandum, 1930, is an example of this change in ideology that stated that the Roosevelt Corollary had no foundation in the Monroe doctrine, such that the US had no right to interfere militarily in Latin America. President F.D. Roosevelt, much like Hoover, adopted measures to promote support in LA. The Good Neighbor Policy, which he adopted, declared that the US wouldnt interfere in the internal affairs of other nations. In fact, in 1938, in Mexico, Roosevelt made use of his policy of nonintervention. The Mexican government and American oil investors had a series of disputes that resulted in the expropriation of the material by Crdenas. Roosevelt tried to settle matters peacefully, without the use of military intervention. The settlement reached in 1940 was not hard to accomplish because there was an isolationist attitude in the American population. We can see that this peaceful ideology was a drastic change from the ideology before the Great Depression. This view was not shared by later American presidents, though. In 1994, Clinton created NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), in light of the same opportunist ideologies as Bush and Reagan, differently than Roosevelt. NAFTA made it so that the American and Mexican labor could compete, such that only the cheaper goods were bought. This resulted in cheaper wages for most of the Mexican population, even though the employment rate decreased. Differently from Roosevelt, Clinton intervened in Mexican affairs to have access to cheaper labor and cheaper goods.

Comparing the personalities of each of the presidents, also allows for a conclusion to be drawn as to whether there was a change or continuity from the policies and actions of later US presidents and their predecessors. The Great Man view allows for such a comparison. Wilson took advantage of his superior naval force and took over the Dominican Republic so that the sugar market would not be disrupted, proving that he favored US interests over the will of the Dominican population. On the contrary, Roosevelt favored nonintervention. He promoted that the US should not interfere in the affairs of other countries. This was proven by his effort to make peaceful agreement in Mexico after the oil disputes. Kennedy, like his predecessors, supported dictatorial regimes in Latin America. This was seen as the only way to solve disorder and revolution created by socialist uprisings. He preferred order over democracy, supporting dictatorial regimes that were loyal to the United States. And finally, Clinton, also like his predecessors, had opportunist ideologies. By creating NAFTA, he lowered the wages of the Mexican working class, which resulted in the increase in the percentage of poverty. There is a clear change from Wilson to Roosevelt from intervention to non-intervention , but then a return to Wilsons type of ideology when Kennedy is in office non-intervention back to intervention. The policies and actions of later U.S. presidents seem to echo the actions of earlier presidents, rather than the ones that directly precede them. This phenomenon reflects both continuity and change over time of the policies and actions, for the actions of the later presidents mirror those that occurred before the depression, which supports continuity in ideology. And the change in policies compared to the ones issued after the depression, impart change. Works Cited Keen, Benjamin e Keith Haynes. A History of Latin America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000.