article no. 1

United States Government’s Involvement in the Governmental Regimes in Specific Latin American Countries

The United States government’s involvement in the governmental regimes of Latin American Countries has caused permanent alterations to these countries’ political, economic, and social frameworks. The United States has often justified their intervention under the guise of fighting communism, or protecting our national security. Despite this, these interventions have frequently destabilized Latin American countries, thus leading to long-term repercussions such as economic inequality, human rights abuses, and mass migration. Specifically, countries such as Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Nicaragua have all experienced varying degrees of interference from the United States. This interference has ranged from orchestrated coups to military aid for authoritarian regimes. The United States government’s actions have not only disrupted the democratic processes of these countries, but also has led to the perpetuated cycles of poverty and violence that are still prevalent today.

It is important to understand history and the trends of the United States government’s involvement because it sheds light on contemporary issues that we are faced with today. Immigration from Latin America to the United States is currently a highly contentious subject, and the stereotypes of these migrants that many people perpetuate can be extremely harmful. This article aims to explore the interconnected history of the United States government’s involvement, and furthermore invites readers to critically examine how historical patterns of foreign intervention have shaped our current world.

CHILE

The United States government has played a significant role in the destabilization of Chile’s government, specifically during the Cold war. During the Cold War, the United States was involved in the 1973 military coup that overthrew democratically-elected President Salvador Allende. The United States has had a long held fear of socialism—for this instance specifically as it was spreading through Latin America—, and so they viewed President Allende’s Marxist policies as a threat to their geopolitical and economic interests. In response to this perceived threat, the Nixon administration implemented various strategies to weaken Chile’s government, by way of the CIA and other agencies. These strategies included covert funding of opposing political parties, major funding to primary media outlets, and incitement of labor strikes; most infamously the Chile truckers’ strike of 1972 which paralyzed Chile’s economy. These actions exacerbated the already present economic instability and generated overall public discontent, which set the stage for the coup in 1973. Specifically, declassified United States government documents revealed that the Nixon administration explicitly directed the CIA to “make the economy scream” in Chile as a way of undermining support for President Allende. 

The culmination of the United States government’s intervention occurred on September 11th, 1973, when General Augusto Pinochet led a violent military coup against President Allende’s administration, with insinuated approval from the United States government. Pinochet’s regime ushered in a period of severe repression for Chile’s public, which included widespread human rights abuses such as, torture, executions, and the forced disappearance of thousands of dissidents to Pinochet’s rule. Pinochet’s implementation of neoliberal policies was supported economically by the United States as they were designed by University of Chicago-trained economists. These policies prioritized privatization and deregulation, which led to deep economic instability within Chile. Although Pinochet’s rule lasted till 1990, this duration of time left lasting scars on Chilean society. It fostered distrust in democratic institutions and exacerbated social inequalities that continue to influence the country’s political landscape today. Furthermore, the United States government’s involvement in Chile not only undermined the sanctity of a democratically-elected government, but it also ingrained Chile with a legacy of authoritarianism and systemic inequality that continues to appear today.

EL SALVADOR

The United States government’s involvement in El Salvador has played a prominent role in destabilizing the country and perpetuating cycles of both violence and inequality, specifically during El Salvador’s Civil War (1979-1992). Once again during the Cold War, policymakers from the United States saw the rise of leftist guerilla groups, such as the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front, as a threat to the regional stability and United States’ interests in Latin America. Because of this, the United States supplied El Salvador’s right-wing government and military with billions of dollars in military and economic aid. Completely ignoring the extensive evidence of human rights abuses, the Reagan administration in particular heavily supported the Salvadoran government’s military forces through training, and supplying military equipment, along with funding. A lot of this training was implemented at the United States-run, School of the Americas, where Salvadoran military officers learned counterinsurgency tactics that they later exercised against Salvadoran civilians. 

It was in part because of the United States extensive support of the Salvadoran officers and paramilitary death squads, that the El Mozote Massacre occurred in 1981. During this massacre nearly 1,000 civilians were killed. Due to the fact that the United States prioritized sending aid to militia-backed solutions, as opposed to addressing systemic issues—such as poverty, land inequality, and political exclusion—, they in effect prolonged the civil war and exacerbated the extent of conflict. The displacement of El Salvador’s civilians, widespread fear of violence, and economic devastation has further destabilized this country, which in turn has fueled the trend of mass migration to the United States. Even after the civil war was ended through the 1992 peace accords, the fact that the United States had placed such immense focus on militarization within this country has left a legacy of weakened institutions and a culture of impunity. This has furthermore contributed to ongoing issues within El Salvador, such as corruption, gang violence, and social instability. Once again, the United States framed the reasons for their involvement as a global fight against communism, while ultimately deepening the internal divisions within El Salvador and undermining their potential for long-term peace and democratic governance. 

GUATEMALA

The United States government’s involvement in Guatemala deeply destabilized the country and has set the stage for decades of political violence and human rights abuses, particularly through the CIA’s 1954 orchestrated coup known as Operation PBSuccess. The coup was against President Jacobo Árbenz, a democratically-elected leader whose progressive policies—such as land reform which aimed at redistributing unused land from large estates to impoverished farmers—threatened the United States government’s interests. Particularly this redistribution of unused land threatened the United States-based United Fruit Company, which was a powerful multinational corporation that held vast holdings in Guatemala. Although he was not, the Eisenhower administration framed President Árbenz as a communist and claimed that his government was a Cold War threat. As a way of countering this threat, the CIA trained and armed a rebel force that was led by Carlos Castillo Armas. Eventually the success of this rebel force led to a coup, but they initially worked to inspire a propaganda campaign in efforts to undermine President Árbenz’s legitimacy. 

This coup was successful in deposing Árbenz from the presidency, but the aftermath of such dove Guatemala into an era of chronic instability. Now President, Castillo Armas created an oppressive regime that reversed the land reforms instilled by Árbenz, and to attack his political opponents, all through the collective power of violence and corruption. His authoritarianism was further established as the United States gave support to his military regimes, all within the guise of fighting the ‘pervasive Communism’ of the time. The United States’ intervention led to a destabilization of the country, which resulted in a civil war that lasted 36 years between the Guatemalan government’s forces and leftist insurgents. During this time, the military—which was often trained and supported by the United States—also engaged in genocide against the indigenous Mayan communities. This civil war resulted in over 200,000 deaths, widespread displacement of civilians, and extreme social divisions. The United States’ intervention in Guatemala’s democratic regime not only befalled their progressive government, but planted the seeds of instability, inequality, and human suffering that still shape Guatemala’s struggles today—all because the United States government chose to prioritize their corporate and anti-communist interests over the prosperity of Guatemala’s democracy.

MEXICO 

The United States government’s influence over Mexico’s governance has been shaped by a complex mix of direct intervention, economic pressure, and political maneuvering. While their intervention within Mexico has often been subtler than the ways they have done this to other Latin American countries, it has still contributed to Mexico’s long-term destabilization. Beginning in the 19th century, the Mexican-American War (1846–1848) significantly weakened Mexico’s sovereignty and economy by forcing it to cede large parts of its territories to the United States. This loss of land undermined the country’s internal cohesion, and set the stage for a continuous theme of political turbulence. Investors that came from the United States weaseled their way into Mexico’s economy in the subsequent decades while under Porfirio Díaz’ regime (1876-1911). Often these investors perpetrated their influence upon critical industries such as oil, railroads, and mining. While this influx of foreign capital worked to enrich a small patch of the Mexican elite and generally stabilized Díaz’s rule in the short term, it also instilled socioeconomic inequality on a larger scale, fueled public resentment, and contributed to the conditions that later sparked the Mexican Revolution (1910–1920). 

Both during the Mexican Revolution, and the aftermath of such, the United States cherry-picked various factions as a means of safeguarding their interest, either through their support or subversion. They did this through deploying military force—such as the 1914 occupation of Veracruz—, as well as through shifting governmental allegiances in a way that prolonged conflict and weakened the legitimacy of the central government. Over the course of the 20th century, although the Institutional Revolutionary Party enjoyed a long, seemingly stable rule, the stability of their government was based on the accommodation of the United States’ economic and national security priorities—which at times seemed to be in opposition to the needs of Mexican civilians. Between the late 20th and early 21st centuries, United States policies—such as their free trade agreements and the War on Drugs—further worked to reshape Mexico’s governance. The onset of NAFTA deepened Mexico’s economic dependency on the United States and inflamed the vulnerability of small farmers, which ultimately contributed to internal migration and social upheaval with Mexico. At the same time, the United States-backed militarized anti-drug policies bolstered security forces that had often been tainted by corruption and abuse. This ultimately undermined the trust Mexican civilians had in their governmental institutions. All in all, the United States’ patterns of involvement ate away at Mexico’s ability to control its own political and economic course, thus leading to the cycles of instability, inequality, and public distrust of the state’s capacity to serve national interests that we see today.

NICARAGUA

The United States government’s involvement in Nicaragua, particularly during the 1980s, profoundly destabilized the country through its support of the Contra War against the Sandinista government. After the Sandinista National Liberation Front overthrew the United States-backed Somoza dictatorship in 1979, the new government implemented socialist reforms. These included land redistribution, expanded education, and healthcare programs. While these socialist reforms aimed to address decades of inequality and corruption present in Nicaragua, the United States perceived the Sandinistas as a Cold War threat, due to their Marxist ideology and alliances with Cuba and the Soviet Union. Under the Reagan administration, the U.S. initiated a covert campaign to undermine the Sandinista government by supporting the Contras—counter-revolutionary forces composed of former Somoza loyalists and other opposition groups. 

The U.S. funneled millions of dollars to the Contras, provided weapons, and trained their forces, despite widespread evidence of Contra human rights abuses—including attacks on civilians and the use of terror tactics. To bypass Congressional restrictions on direct funding, the Reagan administration orchestrated the illegal Iran-Contra affair, selling arms to Iran and diverting the proceeds as a way to support the Contras. The prolonged conflict devastated Nicaragua’s economy, destroyed infrastructure, and displaced thousands of civilians. The United States’ policies also included economic sanctions and trade embargoes, which further sabotaged the Nicaraguan economy and deepened social hardships. 

The destabilization caused by U.S. intervention prolonged Nicaragua’s civil war, undermined its sovereignty, and left deep scars within its political landscape. The conflict weakened the Sandinista government and contributed to the election of a United States-backed oppositional party in 1990, at the cost of leaving a fractured society and an economy that was in ruins. The legacy of U.S. involvement continues to shape Nicaragua’s political and social struggles, as the divisions and economic challenges created during this period persist today.

Blog Post Title Two

It all begins with an idea. Maybe you want to launch a business. Maybe you want to turn a hobby into something more. Or maybe you have a creative project to share with the world. Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.

Don’t worry about sounding professional. Sound like you. There are over 1.5 billion websites out there, but your story is what’s going to separate this one from the rest. If you read the words back and don’t hear your own voice in your head, that’s a good sign you still have more work to do.

Be clear, be confident and don’t overthink it. The beauty of your story is that it’s going to continue to evolve and your site can evolve with it. Your goal should be to make it feel right for right now. Later will take care of itself. It always does.

Blog Post Title Three

It all begins with an idea. Maybe you want to launch a business. Maybe you want to turn a hobby into something more. Or maybe you have a creative project to share with the world. Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.

Don’t worry about sounding professional. Sound like you. There are over 1.5 billion websites out there, but your story is what’s going to separate this one from the rest. If you read the words back and don’t hear your own voice in your head, that’s a good sign you still have more work to do.

Be clear, be confident and don’t overthink it. The beauty of your story is that it’s going to continue to evolve and your site can evolve with it. Your goal should be to make it feel right for right now. Later will take care of itself. It always does.

Blog Post Title Four

It all begins with an idea. Maybe you want to launch a business. Maybe you want to turn a hobby into something more. Or maybe you have a creative project to share with the world. Whatever it is, the way you tell your story online can make all the difference.

Don’t worry about sounding professional. Sound like you. There are over 1.5 billion websites out there, but your story is what’s going to separate this one from the rest. If you read the words back and don’t hear your own voice in your head, that’s a good sign you still have more work to do.

Be clear, be confident and don’t overthink it. The beauty of your story is that it’s going to continue to evolve and your site can evolve with it. Your goal should be to make it feel right for right now. Later will take care of itself. It always does.