Quiz on U.S. Imperialism and the Progressive Movement : 10 Facts

In 1890, Alfred T. Mahan published The Influence of Sea Power upon History, arguing the importance of a strong, modern navy to maintain national strength. He argued that history illustrated that a highly developed modern navy and use of blockades could overpower a well-established land army. He also argued that the United States needed to accomplish several goals to maintain a modern navy, as illustrated by Britain throughout the 19th century. He argued for a canal through the isthmus of Central America, as well as numerous bases and coaling stations throughout the Pacific to promote trade with Asia. Mahan’s work directly influenced the foreign policy of President Theodore Roosevelt, as illustrated by his leadership in the construction of the Great White Fleet, the completion of the Panama Canal, and his support for the Open Door Policy in China. Even the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine can be seen as an extension of Mahan’s arguments for importance of naval power.

Seward’s Folly refers to the United States’ purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867. The purchase was engineered by Secretary of State William H. Seward and Tsar Alexander II for the cost of $7.2 million. At the time, Alaska was seen as a barren wasteland, and the purchase of the nearly 600,000 square miles of northern land was called Seward’s Folly or Seward’s Ice Box. Later, Alaska was found to possess mineral resources of gold and oil that were worth many times what the United States had spent on the purchase. This action was one of several taken by Seward that greatly expanded the international influence of the United States. In 1865, Seward reaffirmed the Monroe Doctrine by arranging to have 50,000 American troops sent to the Texas-Mexico border to resolve the Maximilian Affair, where France tried to instate its own puppet regime in Mexico. Furthermore, in 1867, the year in which the Alaska Territory was purchased, he arranged for the annexation of the Midway Islands. This new territory in the Pacific provided an important military base and coaling station, further fostering trade with Asia.

The Roosevelt Corollary was issued in 1904 by President Theodore Roosevelt. It was announced in response to the Dominican Republic’s government going bankrupt earlier that year. Attempting to keep European powers, such as Germany, from interfering with Latin American and Caribbean nations that had fallen into debt, Roosevelt created this addition to the Monroe Doctrine. In the corollary, the United States asserted the right to intervene within these states to “stabilize” their economic affairs. This notion was extended to include not only economic instability but also political unrest. In addition to justifying involvement in the Dominican Republic, the corollary was cited as justification for the United States to act in Cuba, Nicaragua, Mexico, and Haiti. In this manner, the doctrine is often said to have allowed the United States to act as an international police force in the Western Hemisphere.

Vice President Theodore Roosevelt stated the now-famous words “Speak softly and carry a big stick” at the Minnesota State Fair in September 1901, 12 days before the assassination of President William McKinley put him into the presidency. He also had used the slogan earlier in personal correspondence. Roosevelt borrowed the expression from an African proverb, implying that power was available to retaliate if necessary. He felt that the United States should actively pursue a policy of peace while at the same time brandishing military might. This sentiment became the basis of President Theodore Roosevelt’s foreign policy, often referred to as Big Stick Diplomacy, which placed a strong focus on the United States’s commercial interests in Latin America. It was also further illustrated in his issuing of the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, asserting the right of the United States to intervene in troubled states in the Western Hemisphere to promote stability. Some illustra- tions of Big Stick Diplomacy can be seen in the creation of the Great White Fleet (a modern navy that traveled the globe to display American naval might), Roosevelt’s involvement in the Venezuelan dispute with Great Britain, and the construction of the Panama Canal. Roosevelt’s diplomacy is further illustrated by his use of military force as justification for U.S. intervention in Cuba and Nicaragua. Many of the focuses of Big Stick Diplomacy were continued by Taft through Dollar Diplomacy (see answer to question 353). In contrast, Wilson’s Moral Diplomacy (Missionary Diplomacy) attempted to shift away from the use of military force .

While the concept of an isthmus canal dated back to the 16th century with the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and the King of Spain, the French were the first to attempt its construction in the 1880s. Shortly after, however, they abandoned the project because of costs in terms of money and workers’ lives. Alfred Mahan identified a U.S. need to possess such a canal in his work as a naval historian, and Theodore Roosevelt successfully pursued the engineering feat during his administration. Two locations were considered for the project: Nicaragua and Colombia. Philippe Bunau-Varilla eventually convinced the United States to choose Colombia, and the United States signed and ratified the Hay- Herrán Treaty in 1903. Colombia rejected the treaty, however, so Roosevelt backed a revolt in the Isthmus of Panama, which was then part of Colombia, and quickly recognized the region as an independent state. The United States then negotiated a new treaty, the Hay- Bunau Treaty, in 1903, allowing for the canal. Construction began in May 1904 and was completed in August 1914. The SS Ancon became the first ship to pass through the 48-mile canal.

The Hay-Bunau Treaty was signed on November 18, 1903, by John Hay, the secretary of state under Theodore Roosevelt, and Philippe Bunau-Varilla, who was serving as minister to the United States for the new nation of Panama. The treaty gave the United States complete control of the 10-mile-wide Canal Zone, allowing for the construction of the Panama Canal to begin in May 1904. Philippe Bunau-Varilla, who was born in France, was the chief engineer of France’s attempt to construct a canal through the Isthmus of Panama in the 1880s. He also convinced the United States to choose Panama (which at the time was part of Colombia) as the location for its attempt to build a canal linking the Atlantic and Pacific.

Dollar Diplomacy is associated with the foreign policy of William Howard Taft. It described the efforts under President Taft to further the United States’ policy aims in Latin America and East Asia through economic power. Unlike McKinley’s Gun Boat Diplo- macy or Theodore Roosevelt’s Big Stick Diplomacy, Taft’s approach advocated exchang- ing “dollars for bullets.” In other words, his administration encouraged U.S. bankers to invest in foreign areas of strategic concern to the United States, such as East Asia and Latin America. Much of this effort was led by Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, who regarded the State Department as effectively an agent of the corporate community. This policy was clearly illustrated in Costa Rica and Honduras, where the United Fruit Company had a tight grip on just about every sector of the economy, so these nations came to be referred to as “banana republics.” Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy is also illustrated by the 1909 revolt in Nicaragua. The United States quickly backed the insurgents, who were supported by U.S. mining interests. Following this, Knox encouraged U.S. bankers to invest in Nicaragua and offer substantial loans to the new regime, giving the United States increased financial leverage over the country. President Wilson attempted to move away from both Big Stick Diplomacy and Dollar Diplomacy with his Moral or Missionary Diplomacy . Later, Hoover would introduce the Good Neighbor Policy in Latin America, though the policy itself is generally credited to Franklin Roosevelt. This policy called for the withdrawal of American troops and treatment of Latin American nations more as equals.

Unlike Theodore Roosevelt’s Big Stick Diplomacy and Taft’s Dollar Diplomacy, Wilson’s policy was based on a belief that the United States needed to use the promo- tion of American values and democratic institutions to promote international security. The practice became known as Moral or Missionary Diplomacy. Wilson moved from an era of diplomacy focused on force or finance to a policy committed to justice, democracy, and Christian values. This policy was illustrated when Victoriano Huerta seized power in Mexico, killing the elected president, Francisco Madero. Despite the urging from many in the United States, Wilson refused to recognize the government, calling it a “government of Butchers.” Wilson’s policy of Moral Diplomacy was not always successful. In 1914, he ordered the U.S. Marines to invade Veracruz after American sailors had been detained in what was called the Tampico Incident. William Taft’s urging of U.S. banks to refinance Haiti’s national debt serves as an example of Dollar Diplomacy, and Herbert Hoover’s removal of troops from Nicaragua illustrates the later Good Neighbor Policy.

The goal of the 1907 Gentlemen’s Agreement was to reduce tensions between the United States and Japan, the two most powerful nations of the Pacific. The agreement was made between President Theodore Roosevelt and the emperor of Japan. In the agree- ment, the United States agreed not to place restrictions on Japanese immigrants or students, provided Japan limited further emigration to the United States. The policy was based on the nativist and anti-Japanese sentiments emerging in California during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As a result of the policy, the number of Japanese coming to the United States was reduced, and in return, California allowed Japanese students to attend public schools.

The “insular cases” were the subject of a Supreme Court decision in response to the acquisition of Hawaii and the land gained after the Spanish-American War. With these new lands, people began to debate whether new territories received full constitutional pro- tections and rights. From 1901 to 1905, the Supreme Court made a series of rulings stating that the Constitution fully applied only in incorporated territories (Alaska and Hawaii) but not in unincorporated territories (Guam and the Philippines). This allowed Congress to make the final call on whether new U.S. possessions gained constitutional privileges or not