An Introduction to American Imperialism
Although the United States was founded based on the ideals of liberty and democracy, much of American foreign policy throughout history has been heavily influenced by imperialism. Examining wars, military interventions, and economic policies between the years 1890-1960, this project will explore the rise of American imperialism and its subsequent role in U.S. foreign policy, as well as how it corresponded with a shift away from political and economic isolationism.
While U.S. imperialism reached a major turning point in 1898 with the first territorial expansion outside of the Americas, it is important to analyze a major foreign policy implemented earlier in the century that indicated a greater shift towards imperialism—the Monroe Doctrine. The doctrine had the stated purpose of protecting newly independent Latin American states from European intervention, but more importantly was a way for the United States to stake its claim over the entire Western Hemisphere and dominate it economically. Touching on this, historian Scott Nearing, wrote,
Latin America is in the grip of the Monroe Doctrine. Whether the individual states wish it or not, they are the victims of a principle that has already shorn them of political sovereignty… and that will eventually deprive them of control over their own internal affairs by placing the management of their economic activities under the direction of business interests centering in the United States [1].
Thus, while the US framed the Monroe Doctrine as a protective measure against European imperialism, its true purpose was likely to assert US economic power in the region and to begin establishing Latin America as an American sphere of influence.
A leading cause for this shift to imperialist foreign policy was the capitalist desire to expand markets and obtain new resources. Because by the end of the 19th century most traditional American resources, such as timber and precious metals, were already in private hands, many American businessmen sought to buy land in Hawaii, Cuba, and Puerto Rico in order to gain access to the lucrative resources they possessed, such as tobacco and sugar [2]. American commercial involvement in these countries reached such a high level that the U.S. government began concerted efforts to annex them, particularly Hawaii, where two-thirds of the capital invested in the entire country was owned by Americans [3]. After several failed annexations and an 1893 revolution, Hawaii was finally annexed in 1898 during the Spanish-American War—marking the first time in US history territory outside of the Americas was incorporated into the country [4].
The next major step for American imperialism came with the Spanish-American War and the resulting territorial gains for the United States. By the end of the 19th century, the Spanish Empire had been on a rapid decline and was still struggling heavily with unrest and revolts in its colony of Cuba [5]. American newspapers followed the conflict very closely, using yellow journalism to push for American intervention (although it wasn’t until the sinking of the USS Maine that war was declared). The war itself was very brief, lasting only four months; however results from the peace treaty were significant: Spain ceded Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines to the United States [6]. While all of these territories were ideal for American imperialists and commercialists to expand into new markets, a decision had to be made whether to annex or liberate the Philippines, whose people had been fighting Spain for independence prior to the Spanish-American War. Of course, the intention all along was to annex the islands, but this could not be explicitly stated due to it conflicting with core American values. Thus, in order to justify American expansionism in the region, President McKinley used the new popular theory of Social Darwinism, claiming that the Philippines would be annexed in order to “help and civilize” them [7]. This decision is extremely significant as it demonstrates a complete disregard for the democratic principle of self-determination and shows that the United States was now interested in expanding globally. Ironically, many of the same brutal techniques used to suppress the Cuban unrest (and criticized heavily in American newspapers) were used by the United States to put down the following Filipino insurrection.
Another significant development of American imperialism came with the rise of the United Fruit Company in Central America and the resulting US military interventions in what are now known as the Banana Wars. Between 1898 and 1934, the US conducted multiple interventions in Haiti, Cuba, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Dominican Republic for various reasons relating to the protection of American commercial interests. Not only did thousands die as a result of the interventions, but the fruit companies themselves did major damage to many Latin American communities, subjecting their local employees to cruel and inhumane work conditions [8].
Although by now the United States was clearly by no means opposed to aggressive expansion and interventionism, by the start of World War I it still proclaimed itself as isolationist in foreign policy, and President Wilson declared that the US would remain neutral during the war. While the US officially entered the war in 1917 after the interception of the Zimmermann Telegram, many modern historians argue that the United States’ true purpose of entering the war was to continue the economic trend of global expansion into new markets, and this seems like the more probable reality given Wilson’s previous statements regarding this topic. In 1907 he said, “Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged in the process… the doors of the nations which are closed must be battered down”, and in his 1912 Presidental campaign he said, “Our domestic markets no longer suffice, we need foreign markets [9].” These quotes suggest that the United States had more at stake than just protecting democracy in its participation in the war, and that opening foreign markets to surplus American production was high up in the US’ political priorities.
Before moving on, it’s important to observe the fruits of imperialism that the US enjoyed at this point in history. In 1920 at the Annual Meeting of the Iron and Steel Institute, Judge Gary pointed out that while the US only had 6% of the world’s population and 7% of the world’s land, it produced 20% of the world’s supply of gold, 25% of the world’s supply of wheat, 40% of iron and steel, 40% of lead, 66% of oil, 75% of corn, 85% of automobiles, and more [10].
Joining World War II in 1941 after being attacked at Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, the United States was again the last major belligerent to enter the war. By this point, America was a robust military and industrial power, and again helped to tip the balance of the war to the Allies’ side. After the American and Allied victory, two aspects of American imperialism shifted. First, the US no longer had a stated foreign policy of isolationism—it embraced its supposed role as the world’s superpower and protector of democracy. Second, now that its economy was affirmed as the world’s best, its interventions shifted from economically driven to ideologically driven (against Communism). This shift culminated in the American involvement in both the Korean War in 1950, and the Vietnam War in the 1960s.
Notes:
- Nearing, Scott. The American Empire. New York, Rand School of Social Science, 1921, p. 208
- Nearing, The American Empire, p. 63
- Nearing, The American Empire, p. 63
- Nearing, The American Empire, p. 63
- Nearing, The American Empire, p. 66
- Offner, John. “Why did the United States fight Spain in 1898?” OAH Magazine of History, 1998, vol.12, pp.19-23
- Brody, David. Visualizing American empire orientalism and imperialism in the Philippines. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2010, p. 89
- Schoonover, Thomas D. The Banana Men: American mercenaries and entrepreneurs in Central America, 1880-1930. Kentucky, University Press of Kentucky, 1995, p. 40
- Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. New York, Harper & Row, 1980, p. 353
- Nearing, The American Empire, pp. 187-188