Eisenhower in War and Peace by Jean Edward Smith helps explain why the country with the most Social Justice Warriors is perceived in many parts of the world as acting out of expediency and greed rather than as part of a search for justice. Eisenhower kicked off a new policy of having the CIA run covert operations to overthrow elected governments, typically to protect American commercial interests and typically with the public story that it was part of a fight against global Communism. The 1953 coup in Iran was the first example, with a Guatemalan coup to protect United Fruit Company assets shortly afterwards (Eisenhower had received a cable from his friend William Prescott Allen: “Yes, Guatemala has a very small minority of Communists, but not as many as San Francisco.”) Smith characterizes Eisenhower as a political genius, but points out that in this case he failed to see the long-lasting consequences of being discovered.
I’m wondering if in the long run the Chinese will be seen as the honest foreign power. The Europeans are tarnished by their colonial history. We’re tarnished by the above and other adventures.
Steven Kinzer’s All the Shah’s Men confirms that Teddy Roosevelt’s grandson became the CIA’s, and Britain’s, instrument for the overthrow of Mossadegh. The US controlled most of the Iranian press, hired thugs to start riots under communist banners, and paid off Iranians in the police and military. It was touch ‘n go. The first attempt at a coup was foiled by a tip-off and Roosevelt was told to leave Iran. He didn’t. His coup came shortly thereafter while Mossadegh was celebrating the failure of the first try. Mossadegh was completely unprepared for another attempt, and fooled by the Americans who were pretending to support him.
There are many Latin American cases of subverting third world governments in the first person account, Confessions of an Economic Hitman. http://www.amazon.com/New-Confessions-Economic-Hit-Man/dp/1626566747/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
But America’s image will not be tarnished forever by those neo-colonialist policies. The new generations do not have much political memory, and historical accounts will remember that there were citizen collaborators in the plundered countries. The foreign leaders got to choose between a bribe of silver or the lead of a bullet, but this was not an American invention. Most took the bribe and thereby continued a long established pattern of sanity and good judgment according to tribal mores and king making.
As literacy and education improve, so do justice and constitutional government. It’s a bumpy progression but a progression nonetheless.
It is hard to imagine that China will emerge as the most honest foreign power. Their foreign ventures must also involve the kickbacks expected by foreign leaders. They may not be charged to the same extent with subverting democracy by violent means, but they don’t set precedents for transparency and decency either.
The writer does not seem to know much about world history. The Chinese managed to slaughter about 30 million of their own people in the Cultural Revolution. The US is probably the most beneficent power in world history. The British “colonialists” are not far behind. What powers would be better? The Russians enslaving 350 million people? The Ottomans collecting slaves throughout southern Europe? The Spaniards destroying the great civilizations of central and south America? The Belgians enslaving he Congo? The Germans? The Romans? The Vikings? History gives context to what human beings are capable of and Guatemala and United Fruit Company are not big events in the sorry history of humanity. Whatever the facts are about United Fruit Company, wouldn’t you think that the majority of Guatemalans would give one or more of their limbs to live in the US rather than in one of the most crime ridden places on the planet?
Tarnished? The Iranians should be grateful that the USA postponed the tyrannical Islamist rule that they now have. They would be better off if the USA installed a puppet dictator.
George,
Ousting Mossadegh and installing the Shah shut down democracy and set up the mullahs as the alternative. The Saudis have done the same with the Wahhabi clerics. Our meddling has been a boon to radical Islam.
If it’s not “tarnished”, it’s probably not much of a foreign power.
It’s relative. Homo sapiens got to be king of the hill by eliminating the near competition. It’s a strong evolutionary trait. Anything resembling fairness or justice for those outside the tribe is a fairly recent invention, probably within the last 30 thousand years. We call it “enlightened self-interest,” emphasis on self. As trade, agriculture, and alliances proved to be beneficial to the tribe, the umbrella-tribe expanded to include city states, kingdoms, nation states, and now global alliances (NATO, EU). It’s only mass communication and politically correct pretense that grand self-evident truths (that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator…) apply to those outside the tribe. Whether it’s Native American slaughter in the conquest of a continent or sending in the Marines to support the corporate interests of United Fruit Co., it’s the tribe, however you define it, that matters.
China has its hands full. If the current power structure can keep a lid on things (not easy), China has a bright future. Ethically, China’s history is no better or no worse than the United States. The United States was one of the last world powers to end slavery. And Lincoln had to kill more than half-million Americans to do it. The United States is in no position to preach good conscience and ethics to anyone. Especially to people with long memories, like China.
Trump is appealing to base tribal instincts. These are ancient and powerful drives. Caveat emptor.
“One of the very first acts of the Islamist regime—whose predecessors in the 1950s supported U.S. policy by the way—was to repress the followers of Mossadegh. Consequently, a country whose rulers supported a coup and then repressed the opponents of the coup can scarcely be said to hate America for supporting the coup.” — Barry Rubin on the 1953 coup in Iran (blog and book).
http://rubinreports.blogspot.be/2012/01/response-to-ron-paul-did-us-policy-make.html
Post WW2 was the post colonial age – people figured out that paying money for raw materials is much cheaper than the cost of maintaining colonies/direct rule. (also the world wars were very much motivated by the aspirations of Germany and Japan for a colonial empire of their own … )
I think that the scrapping of colonialism was a very significant change that saved countless lives – and it came about thanks to US hegemony; Eisenhower’s empire was much more benign than British rule of the 19th and early 20th century. The USA did not need its own Opium wars or Indian famines.