Read this article about American Imperialism around the turn of the 20th century. Although American expansion continued well into the 20th century, this era is arguably the one most marked by American imperialist ideas.
Patterns of American Interventions
American interventions
in Mexico, China, and the Middle East reflected the United States' new
eagerness to intervene in foreign governments to protect American
economic interests abroad.
The United States had long been
involved in Pacific commerce. American ships had been traveling to
China, for instance, since 1784. As a percentage of total American
foreign trade, Asian trade remained comparatively small, and yet the
idea that Asian markets were vital to American commerce affected
American policy and, when those markets were threatened, prompted
interventions.1 In 1899, secretary of state John Hay articulated the
Open Door Policy, which called for all Western powers to have equal
access to Chinese markets.
Hay feared that other imperial powers -
Japan, Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, and Russia - planned to
carve China into spheres of influence. It was in the economic interest
of American business to maintain China for free trade. The following
year, in 1900, American troops joined a multinational force that
intervened to prevent the closing of trade by putting down the Boxer
Rebellion, a movement opposed to foreign businesses and missionaries
operating in China. President McKinley sent the U.S. Army without
consulting Congress, setting a precedent for U.S. presidents to order
American troops to action around the world under their executive
powers.2
The United States was not only ready to intervene in
foreign affairs to preserve foreign markets, it was willing to take
territory. The United States acquired its first Pacific territories with
the Guano Islands Act of 1856. Guano - collected bird excrement - was a
popular fertilizer integral to industrial farming. The act authorized
and encouraged Americans to venture into the seas and claim islands with
guano deposits for the United States. These acquisitions were the first
insular, unincorporated territories of the United States: they were
neither part of a state nor a federal district, and they were not on the
path to ever attain such a status. The act, though little known,
offered a precedent for future American acquisitions.3
Merchants,
of course, weren't the only American travelers in the Pacific.
Christian missionaries soon followed explorers and traders. The first
American missionaries arrived in Hawaii in 1820 and China in 1830, for
example. Missionaries, though, often worked alongside business
interests, and American missionaries in Hawaii, for instance, obtained
large tracts of land and started lucrative sugar plantations. During the
nineteenth century, Hawaii was ruled by an oligarchy based on the sugar
companies, together known as the "Big Five". This white American
(haole) elite was extremely powerful, but they still operated outside
the formal expression of American state power.4
As many Americans
looked for empire across the Pacific, others looked to Latin America.
The United States, long a participant in an increasingly complex network
of economic, social, and cultural interactions in Latin America,
entered the late nineteenth century with a new aggressive and
interventionist attitude toward its southern neighbors.
American
capitalists invested enormous sums of money in Mexico during the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, during the long reign of the
corrupt yet stable regime of the modernization-hungry president Porfirio
Diaz. But in 1910 the Mexican people revolted against Díaz, ending his
authoritarian regime but also his friendliness toward the business
interests of the United States. In the midst of the terrible destruction
wrought by the fighting, Americans with investment interests pleaded
for governmental help. But the U.S. government tried to control events
and politics that could not be controlled. More and more American
businessmen called for military intervention. When the brutal strongman
Victoriano Huerta executed the revolutionary, democratically elected
president Francisco Madero in 1913, newly inaugurated American president
Woodrow Wilson put pressure on Mexico's new regime. Wilson refused to
recognize the new government and demanded that Huerta step aside and
allow free elections to take place. Huerta refused.5
When Mexican
forces mistakenly arrested American sailors in the port city of Tampico
in April 1914, Wilson saw the opportunity to apply additional pressure
on Huerta. Huerta refused to make amends, and Wilson therefore asked
Congress for authority to use force against Mexico. But even before
Congress could respond, Wilson invaded and took the port city of
Veracruz to prevent, he said, a German shipment of arms from reaching
Huerta's forces. The Huerta government fell in July 1914, and the
American occupation lasted until November, when Venustiano Carranza, a
rival of Huerta, took power. When Wilson threw American support behind
Carranza, and not his more radical and now-rival Pancho Villa, Villa and
several hundred supporters attacked American interests and raided the
town of Columbus, New Mexico, in March 1916, and killed over a dozen
soldiers and civilians. Wilson ordered a punitive expedition of several
thousand soldiers led by General John J. "Blackjack" Pershing to enter
northern Mexico and capture Villa. But Villa eluded Pershing for nearly a
year and, in 1917, with war in Europe looming and great injury done to
U.S.-Mexican relations, Pershing left Mexico.6
The United States'
actions during the Mexican Revolution reflected long-standing American
policy that justified interventionist actions in Latin American politics
because of their potential bearing on the United States: on citizens,
on shared territorial borders, and, perhaps most significantly, on
economic investments. This example highlights the role of geography, or
perhaps proximity, in the pursuit of imperial outcomes. But American
interactions in more distant locations, in the Middle East, for
instance, look quite different.
In 1867, Mark Twain traveled to
the Middle East as part of a large tour group of Americans. In his
satirical travelogue, The Innocents Abroad, he wrote, "The people [of
the Middle East] stared at us everywhere, and we [Americans] stared at
them. We generally made them feel rather small, too, before we got done
with them, because we bore down on them with America's greatness until
we crushed them".7 When Americans later intervened in the Middle East,
they would do so convinced of their own superiority.
The U.S.
government had traditionally had little contact with the Middle East.
Trade was limited, too limited for an economic relationship to be deemed
vital to the national interest, but treaties were nevertheless signed
between the U.S. and powers in the Middle East. Still, the majority of
American involvement in the Middle East prior to World War I came not in
the form of trade but in education, science, and humanitarian aid.
American missionaries led the way. The first Protestant missionaries had
arrived in 1819. Soon the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign
Missions and the boards of missions of the Reformed Church of America
became dominant in missionary enterprises. Missions were established in
almost every country of the Middle East, and even though their efforts
resulted in relatively few converts, missionaries helped establish
hospitals and schools, and their work laid the foundation for the
establishment of Western-style universities, such as Robert College in
Istanbul, Turkey (1863), the American University of Beirut (1866), and
the American University of Cairo (1919).8