Chile: the balanced view : a recopilation of articles about the Allende years and after

UNITED STATES-CHILEAN RELATIONS(*) By RIORDAN ROETT Any discussion of United States-Chilean relations must be considereJ in the broader context of United States relations with Latin America in general. It is no ionger sufficient to consider a return to the "traditional" relationship characterized by varying degrees of paternalism and neglect in different historical periods. The very terms "paternalísm" and "neglect" índicate the qual íty and tone of the relatíonship between the United States and its neighbors in the hemisphere -one of dependence and subordination. .It can be argued that the history 01 Latín America afier independence in the early 19th century allowed for tlO other relationship. The security interestsofthe United States, itself a new nation, required firm and audacious efforts to preclude European colonization. The lack of self-generating economic development in Latin America, combined with a high level of societal inequality and political chaos in the vast majority of the republics, contraSted sharply with the process of modernization in North America (jt is interesting to note that Chile was one of the few exceptions to this general interpretation of the 19th century). As that gap grew ever larger, it led to increasing interest and intervention in the internal affairs of the Latin American nation-states. The Platt Amendment, the Roosevelt Corollary, and the moralism ofWoodrowWilson's policy in Mexico represented the apogee of direct, military intervention. With the promulgation of the Good Neighbor Policy, under Franklin Delano Roosevelt's administration, and the succeeding initiatives of Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy that resulted in the Alliance for Progress, paternalism and intervention continued but normaliy under different auspices, save in the Caribbean where the traditional methods were employed. The emphasis shified to diplomatic, economic, and advisory intervention. Much ofthe United States role in Latin America afier 1945 was predicated on a shared view ofthe threat to hemispheric security posed by the Soviet Uníon and international communism. With a reductionin international tension, and the movemerit from bipolarityto multipolarity, the Un ited States adopted a developmental ist approach to Latin America that necessítated the transfer of hundreds of million of dollars of public and private funds, the stationing of tens of thousands of North Americans in Latin America, and required the creation of a "partners in progress" mentality that ended in failure, as had other initiatives. This all too brief summary ofthe history ofthe United States.re·'ations with Latin America should indicate the futil ity of a return to the past for models for structuring a new relations– hipo The United States must realize that Latin America has changed dramatically over the past two decades. Neither outright mílitary intervention nor more subtle social and econo– míc assistance "package" programs are warranted or required. For better or tor worse, Latin ~merica: nations have begun to come of age, The recognition of a need tor a new policy can best begin in the United States Congress. It does not necessitate the wholesale condemnation or abandonment of past policy. Al! great powersact in their own interests and those interests ofien appear to require decisíons and poi icies that wil', afier the fact, be Seen as outmoded or incorrect or actually deleterious to the long-range interests of that power. It requires little courage, and perhaps less intelligence, to condem the past and attack the United States as an imperialist power bent on the total subversionof Latín ( *)Statement before the Subcommittee on Inter~American Affairs, House Committee on Foreign affairs. Hearings on prospects for United States-Chilean Relations. August 5. 1974. 283