South America and the WarKirkpatrick, F. A. (Frederick Alexander)
History
South America and the War
Kirkpatrick, F. A. (Frederick Alexander)
Latin America -- Economic conditions; World War, 1914-1918 -- Latin America
In any case, the obvious comment on the Monroe Doctrine is that it has
indeed protected the American republics from European aggression, but
has not protected them from American aggression. It has not protected
Peru from Chile nor Mexico and Colombia from the United States. Again,
it is a uni-lateral arrangement announced by one Power alone, on the
assumption that this action would be taken for granted by the other
American republics. This attitude does not entirely commend itself to
those states, especially as they grow stronger and more conscious of
their strength. American business men plainly assert that the Monroe
Doctrine is bad for business[4], and warn their countrymen against
straining after a fictitious inter-American sentiment--an attitude which
"is often a cause for resentment, the more felt because seldom expressed
by the courteous Latin[5]." An article in the Pan-American Bulletin for
December 1917 deserves particular attention. It cleaves through the
difficulty by declaring, on the authority of Mr Root, that the Monroe
Doctrine today means no more than what President Monroe meant a century
ago: "The Monroe Doctrine is an assertion of the right of self-defence,
that and nothing more. France and Britain are in the field to protect
their Monroe Doctrine, the sovereignty and independence of Belgium ...
there is nothing here ... in any way derogatory to the full sovereignty
and independence of even the smallest of the Latin-American countries.
It is true that the first proclamation of the Monroe Doctrine carried
with it an implied offer of aid to the newly liberated Spanish-American
colonies against proposed aggressions by the Holy Alliance.
Self-protection was the motive ... it counts for nothing against a set
purpose to defend one's own house that in so doing one performs an act
by which one's neighbour is likewise defended." The article concludes by
declaring that the Monroe Doctrine still prevails, strictly limited to
its original sense, and that Pan-Americanism is an entirely distinct
policy, which must not be confused with it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account