U.s. The United States

In Empire’s Workshop, Greg Grandin argues that the United States engineered a destructive domestic fusion of religious fundamentalism, hawkish neoconservatism, and nationalism - to justify it’s engagement in a jingoistic, self-serving foreign policy in Latin America. Furthermore, his work details the preemptive clash against perceived communist elements, and places the ideological disagreements regarding private-property, as the primary mover in US actions. By examining the Guatemalan coup of 1954, which Grandin describes as the Central Intelligence Agency’s “first full-scale covert operation” in Latin America, we can assess the prototypical reasoning behind US intervention. Moreover, the thorough assessment of the motivations of American

When Hugo Chavez emerged as an iconic figure against anti-imperialism he was supported by Evo Morales (Bolivia), Lula da Silva (Brazil), Cristina Kirchner (Argentina), Rafael Correa (Ecuador), Raul Castro (Cuba). The reason why these leftist political leaders supported Chavez because of the intentions Chavez had to get people out of poverty and make Venezuela a rich Latin Nation. Another reason towards why Chavez was supported was because he demonstrated that the U.S. was not needed in order to prosper. Due to this, Chavez main opponent became the United States specially under the control of President George W. Bush. Since Chavez was becoming more popular in Latin America and was being aided by Cuba, the United States felt threatened and got

OPEN LETTER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FEDERATION OF CENTRAL AMERICA BY THE MILITARY GOVERNMENT OF SPAIN

The article “Paraguay’s Archive of Terror: International Cooperation and Operation Condor” by Katie Zoglin centers around the way in which the Southern Cone countries, with a specific focus on Paraguay, dealt with political opponents. The article was written in the period of winter-spring in 2001. This is significant because the article is also from the American Law Review at Miami University in a period just after the 9/11 attacks. This could affect some of the ideas about military governments and intelligence, being as the U.S. would likely be concerned with these ideas right after a terrorist attack. However, since the article is about Latin America, the influence of 9/11 might not be significant in this particular case.

The late 1800s saw relations between the United States and Latin America become more imbalanced as the U.S. started to emerge as a world power. Always interested in Latin America, the U.S. became more entrenched through both military means and business investments in the region. This involvement lead to increasing tension between the U.S. and its southern neighbors, with growing distrust and resentment on their part toward a country which never hesitated to make its power known. The U.S. began to flex its might more and more during these years and even in the interim of military actions U.S. businesses were steadily building monopolies.

“Castillo was declared president and set about reversing land reforms that benefited poor farmers. He also removed voting rights for illiterate Guatemalans. Guatemala’s 36-year civil war began”

In 1959, Cuban leaders echoed similar sentiments. A revolution on one island? The actions of guerrillas of the mountains and the underground were rooted in a larger revolutionary context, one supplied by Bolívar, O’Higgins, and the other Latin American liberators. Cuba began to “export” revolution— at least ideas—to Caribbean islands and to the South and Central American countries as well. By 1960, given the predictable response of Washington to any sort of disobedience, Cuba had taken its first steps toward partnership with the no longer revolutionary Soviet Union. In doing so, it got caught in the seamy fabric of the cold war. Fidel learned of the revolution’s “junior” status during the 1962 missile crisis, when Soviet Premier Khrushchev

One of the main challenges with contemplating a new business in Venezuela is the current government scheme and the presidents apparent dislike for America. Nicolas Maduro has visions of creating a socialistic society for Venezuela, which former president Hugo Chávez fostered all throughout his presidency. Nicolas Maduro has also publicly ridiculed the United States for meddling in its affairs. Nicolas Maduro appears to have a great fear of being ousted by force, accusing the United States of attempting to overthrow him. In fact, Otis (2015) indicated that “as the U.S. prepares to reopen its embassy in communist Cuba, relations with oil-rich Venezuela are crumbling. President Nicolas Maduro accuses the U.S. of plotting a coup against him, and is expelling most U.S. diplomats from Venezuela” (para. 1). It is curious that he rants negativity, but then does not threaten sanctions against the United States. Consequently, the United States is the largest importer of its oil; thereby making it a vital ally of its dwindling economy. The adage, “don’t bite the hand that feeds you” comes to mind; the United States just might cut off ties with him if this banter continues. The fact that

Another reason for stimulation in Venezuela was the fact of “foreign control of the oil industry for much of the twentieth century reinforced these values” (7). The more that Venezuela was involved in trade with other countries like the United States for example made the country similar to advanced Western nations. As Venezuela began to improve economic and social standing in the world their voice became stronger and the country began to influence international debates on many issues affecting the world. Venezuela was going through so many rapid changes that the United States could not keep up with these constant changes. Furthermore, even though the United States is still a prominent factor for Venezuela they wanted to further their ties with other countries for a better chance for investments, they began to trade with countries such as, “Brazil, India, Iran, Russia and China”

Indeed, the U.S. corporate interests in Honduras are important, with multinationals such as Dole and Chiquita employing 11,000 people as well as manufacturers in apparel, auto part and mining and hydroelectric investment (Frank, 2012). However, in the two first years of his mandate, he moved to the left, especially towards Venezuela, taking in part in 2008 in the ALBA initiative (Cannon & Hume, 2012; Ruhl, 2010; Maher 2012). Therefore, after the coup, the de facto government retrenched to its obsequious behaviour towards the oligarchy, what some refer to as the ‘second coup’, a push for the agenda of transnational investors and Honduran elites (Cannon & Hume, 2012; Frank,

Venezuela has been gradually turning into a tyranny. What used to be one of the most economically prosperous countries in Latin America, has been corrupted by a sole man, who single-handedly managed to control Venezuela for 15 years and pull it away from the ideal of democracy.[1] While alive, Hugo Chávez arose like a populist false prophet, took advantage of an establishment-tired and politically divided Venezuela, and did everything possible to perpetuate his own power and pave the way for a monopolistic tyrannical regime.[2] During his rule, Chávez centralized power in Venezuela, reduced freedom and individual rights, and modified and consequently abused the political instruments at his disposal.[3] He contaminated education, nationalized and used media for propaganda[4], and turned the rich and the poor against each other, in order to monopolize politics in Venezuela, enrich himself to the detriment of the rest, and perpetuate the control of his party in the country. Day to day, people become increasingly poorer in Venezuela.[5] The government this caudillo left behind has become unbeatable and has inspired hate between supporters and dissidents. Violence and insecurity have become appallingly recurring in Venezuela.[6] The rise of Socialism in Venezuela and Hugo Chávez’s way of governing tremendously resemble the rise of tyranny in Plato’s The Republic and Hobbes’ The Leviathan sovereign way of governing.

The date September 11th is not only a date of terror for the United States, but for the country Chile it also marks the anniversary of a new error of fear. On September 11th, 1973 General Augusto Pinochet overthrew President Salvador Allende, a democratically elected socialist. For seventeen years after this Pinochet dictated over Chile and caused for the murder of over three thousand Chileans, the disappearance of over a thousand, and the torture and jailing of tens of thousands more. What might be even more shocking though, is that the United States had a direct contribution to this brutal dictators rise. The United States’ fear of communist nations developing and

The United States, is often seen as wanting to spread values of democracies to countries around the world. However, in Chile the United States helped end the democracy which lasted for over 40 years until the military coup. This paper will examine if the United States topple democracy in Chile in favor of a military dictatorship to avoid socialism within Chile to protect its own interests, or the interests of the Chilean citizens? This paper will only examine what the United States did to influence the politics of Chile before the military coup and why it would then support the rise of the dictator Pinochet. This paper will not look at the specific causes of what initiated the military coup as this was a result of the Chilean

From 1964 - 1985 Brazil was under the influence of a military regime that killed or “disappeared” political activists and trade unionists and tortured many others. Brazil’s military regime ruled Brazil by rotating military presidents, held elections, and kept Congress open. However, in reality, the elections held were heavily manipulated and the military openly threatened Congress if it began to operate against the views and wishes of the regime.

The lectures in class this week and the article “10 of the Most Lethal CIA Interventions in Latin America” by Olivier Acuña has opened my eyes to the U.S.’s international political connections. The U.S. has proved throughout history to be self serving and has proven to intervene in nations that will lead to its own economic and political advantages. I find it unfortunate that the CIA and American government tries to pride itself on our democratic system, but will support corrupt dictators and absolute rulers