The Tragedy Of American Diplomacy

America’s role in the international arena during the 1900s is best captured in the poem by Kipling, “The White Man’s Burden” and had been clearly articulated in the speeches of Roosevelt and Beveridge. The American government believed that it is the American duty to interfere and be an influential power in the civilizing of nations that American’s perceived as unable to rule over themselves or as savages, illiterate, and the cause of chaos which ultimately affects the America’s vision of successful world commercial activities. However, it must be clarified that this goal is characterized by conflicted opinions within the American nation itself. Some believed that America should not interfere with the fate of other nations and argue for their

The Spanish-American War was considered short lived and relatively mild in terms of American casualties compared to the many wars that our nation has fought. However, it served as a historical marker that set the imperialistic momentum of our nation. It played a significant role in our nation’s strategic move towards acquiring trade routes and further strengthened our naval power. Throughout my research paper I will touch on what led to the Cuban revolution against Spain, America’s political climate at the time, and why our nation eventually decided to intervene and aid the Cubans in their fight for independence.

After the civil war, United States took a turn that led them to solidify as the world power. From the late 1800s, as the US began to collect power through Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines, debate arose among historians about American imperialism and its behavior. Historians such as William A. Williams, Arthur Schlesinger, and Stephen Kinzer provides their own vision and how America ought to be through ideas centered around economics, power, and racial superiority.

Many historians argue that the U.S. took the moral high ground during the war because they set out to end the suffering of the Cuban people at the hands of Spain, citing the crux of McKinley’s War Message. Although this may be true to some extent, the worst of the rebellion had ended by 1898 as the result of a ceasefire agreement and the departure of General Valeriano Weyler; therefore, American interference was needlessly invasive. Some also point to the Teller Amendment as counter-evidence against the imperialistic nature of the war, but, following the war, the Platt Amendment to the Cuban Constitution transformed Cuba from a truly independent nation into a puppet of the U.S. for enforcing the Monroe Doctrine on Europe’s empires. Moreover, the motive to free an oppressed Cuba fails to explain why the U.S. also took action to remove Spain from the Philippines, where no major rebellion was taking place. Although morality may have played some role, its motivational effect was far outweighed by the imperialism and hysteria factors.

While public tensions before August 1898 were surely high, nothing turned the public against Spain like the tragic blowing up of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor. The lives of 260 American officers and men were lost. The yellow press and American investigators quickly blamed spanish officials in Cuba for the mysterious wreck. Although it is extremely unlikely that the spanish had anything to do with the Maine’s sinking, the War-Mad American public accepted this conclusion out of rage, overwhelmingly persuading President Mckinley to begin the war. McKinley personally did not want to fight a war against Spain, for he had seen enough bloodshed as a General in the Civil War. But the public, encouraged by the Cuban patriotic cause, yellow journalism, and the sinking of the Maine, clamored for a war. Finally, President McKinley yielded and gave the people what they wanted. He believed that the people should rule, even if they don’t know what’s best for themselves. Public pressure was the main reason we went to war with Spain, and the biggest cultivator of public unrest was the blowing up of “The Maine”.

The Spanish-American War began as a humanitarian effort to free Cuba from Spain’s colonial grasp and ended with the United States itself acquiring territory overseas and fighting a dirty guerrilla war with Filipino nationalists who, like the Cubans, sought independence. Behind the contradiction stood the twin pillars of American foreign policy: The Monroe Doctrine made Spain’s presence in Cuba unacceptable, and U.S. determination to keep open the door to Asia made the Philippines attractive as a stepping-stone to China.

The American people sided more towards the Cubans then with Spain within during the war. There was a big difference between the Cubans and the Spanish people. The Cubans were very poor people who did have much, while the Spanish controlled everything and had everything. This upsetted many people from the poor to the rich, and the Spanish just wanted to do what was right. The War with Spain was ultimately suppose to help the other people and the government. And this War with Spain started to include the Blacks which was gonna end up making things more peaceful and an “era of good feelings”. All Spain wanted was a perfect sound of unity among the people around them without the issues of racism, etc. (document 1) As a step to fix this, the American government try to adopt a policy of neutrality to help with this issue. The Americans reached out for help, but got little in return. McKinley just wanted to help the Philippines. They were unfit for self-government as I said above, and soon as time went on, they would have an “anarchy” and would soon be misruled for so many things. According to Document 3, McKinley just wanted the Philippines to be involved in the church and one night after speaking to God, he figured it all out. He decided that all he could do was to educate them and to provide them with everything he possibly could. (document 3) A lot of the Americans were starting to believe that all the people were ready to start accepting peace and neutrality, that was still yet to come in the years to follow. (document 4) The Spanish-American War had a big effect on a lot of things throughout the 19th and 20th

The Spanish-American war consisted of a series of influential battles that pitted America and many of Spain’s colonies against Spanish rule, and ended with Spain losing its colonies and America gaining control over more and more land. In 1898, America joined a war being pit against Spain to force the Spanish to relinquish all control of their colonies, including Guam, Puerto Rico, and Cuba. This same war ended only a few months later, with Spain suffering huge losses and America gaining money and territories. The Spanish American war could be split into three main points of interest: How and why the Spanish American war started, The battles of Manila, Santiago de Cuba, Asomante, and Las Guasimas ( And the Rough Riders) , and the aftermath of the war. One of the most interesting territories was Cuba. Although the Spanish american war was not a long and costly war, it changed many people's lives indefinitely.

century, the outcome of the Spanish-American war divided Americans into those for and against the annexation of the Philippines. The masses supporting it saw the islands as a strong foothold for the country in Chinese markets, compared to the minority which believed the United States was founded to escape oppression and should not lead to doing the same upon others. America becoming an imperial power shifted the world stage, and opened opportunity in trade on the other side of the world. Annexing the Philippines changed how other countries saw the United States, but more importantly it changed how Americans feel about their country; citizens rallied around the flag after defeating Spain because surpassing the empire’s navy gave them something positive to think of after all the turmoil over the past hundred years (and still at the time over working/living conditions and inequality between races/genders). It gave the public a reason to be patriotic. If the United States did not annex the Philippines when it did, it would not have had the ability to become the strongest government in the world and increase exports throughout Asia, but at what cost? American leaders decided it would be a good power move, but did

The Spanish-American War of 1898 could be seen as the pivotal point in foreign policy as it marks America’s first engagement with a foreign enemy in the dawning age of modern warfare however, one could also argue that the idea had always existed in American politics.

The Spanish American War started in 1898 and lasted about four months. Although the war might have seemed focused on freeing Cuba from Spain and gaining independence for Cuba and the Philippines, it was actually stimulated by nationalism and commercialism. Commercialism was a major factor when declaring war because the United States depended on Cuba and the Philippines for trade and business with other countries, especially in Asia and Latin America. Another major factor for the war was that the United States wanted to spread its Anglo-Saxon culture around the world and emerge as a world-wide power. Other minor motives for the war include the United States coming to the aid of the Cubans in their revolt against Spain and the feeling that

In 1863, President Abraham Lincoln spoke the timeless words ??government of the people, by the people, for the people?. He might not have known they were the undercurrent of a war that was fought eighty-two years prior in 1781; a war fought one hundred and forty-eight years in the future in 2011. I truly believe that the government floats by the ebbs and flows of its citizens will and opinion. Their will can drive us to war or their will melts away not remembering why we went to war in the first place. The peoples will is the rudder steering the Diplomatic, Information, Military and Economic ?DIME? spectrum maneuvering its way across the governmental swamp. The peoples will to vote and protest shape our diplomatic outcomes. The peoples

However, the organization of the book proved to be beneficial to Williams’ it successfully portrays why he wrote the book and how passionately he felt about its topics. The Tragedy of American Diplomacy follows and critiques the twentieth century belief that the substantial surge of growth in the nineteenth century was crucial to the opulence and security to go forward in America. He highlights the distinction between this idea and the determined quest of expansion with the belief of many Americans that this “economic intervention” would usher in wealth and tranquility to the rest of the world. The tragedy that Williams informs us about is purely ironic because, The American ideals at the time contradict with what was

"American imperialism in 1898 was not a sudden abandonment of anti-colonial tradition but was a logical extension of commercial expansion, something the US had been doing throughout its history" (SparkNotes: The Spanish American War, 1898-1901,: Effects of the Treaty). President McKinley was not interested in wars of conquest or of territorial aggression. His interest in expansion was "to make the United States first in international commerce and as a means to implement its humanitarian and democratic goals" (Faragher, J., Buhle, M. J., & Armitage, S. H. ,2008, Out of Many, A History of the American People, 6th ed., Vol. 2, p. 561). McKinley would eventually be forced to act in a humanitarian effort for the people of Cuba and to protect

He begins more abstractly and then applies these principles to America. Specifically he says that power leads to a sense of superiority and is confused with virtue. Fulbright defines the “arrogance of power” as the “psychological need that nations seem to have in order to prove that they are bigger, better or stronger than other nations”. Clearly, these statements provide the premise of the book. As such, it explains Americas actions in all the situations exemplified in the book. After Fulbright analyzes patriotism in America, specifically when relating to the citizen, universities and the senate. For example, he describes the political climate at the time as opposed to descent and criticism. Despite this, he mentions the anti-war movement and describes both it being conducted and accepted as a sign of maturity and patriotism. That is to say, criticism is vital to democracy and consensus is a threat to freedom. Similarly, he describes how senate is in decline because of its unquestioning acceptance of the president’s request for war and as a result the decline in its Importance in the area of international relations and war. On account of this, Fulbright denounces the diminished importance of debate and dissent in the senate. In part two of the book, Fulbright analyzes revolutions and America’s perspective on them. According to Fulbright, America is an un-revolutionary society with