Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
This paper analyzes one primary source: the monthly bulletin of the Bureau of American Republics (later, the Pan American Union), which ran from 1893 to 1948. The publication, which evolved into a general interest magazine on hemispheric affairs by the 1910s, sought to encourage pan-American exchange and mutual familiarity. It advanced ideas of the hemisphere amenable to U.S. hegemony while also opening space to Latin Americans to advance their own ideas of progress and hemispheric civilization. The Bulletin thus offers a window into the cultural and intellectual negotiations between societies in the Americas during the expansion of U.S. imperialism.
Luncheon Club. Invited to speak about his definition of 'Pan Americanism', Edwards wasted no time in framing his perspective. 'I am an American,' he began, 'a South American, and I have won my spurs as a businessman.' 1 In this simple statement Edwards achieved two objectives: he reminded his audience that 'American' opinions-including those on diplomatic initiatives such as Pan-Americanism-were not limited to those of the United States and he piqued the interest of the commerceminded men that composed the majority of his listeners. Edwards was not, however, a mere businessman. He was the founder of one of the most important newspapers in Chile (El Mercurio, Santiago edition), an alumnus of Chile's National Congress, a former Chilean foreign minister, and a scion of one of the wealthiest and most influential families within Chile's oligarchy. His impressive curriculum vitae added import to his perspective and suggested that his opinions held sway within the government in Santiago. Within this context, Edwards made a bold claim; Argentina, Brazil, Chile (the so-called ABC nations) and the United States were called to be the 'vanguard of Pan-Americanism.' 2 1 El Mercurio, 8 August 1916. 2 Ibid.
Cooperation and Hegemony in U.S.-Latin American Relations: Revisiting the Western Hemisphere Idea, eds. Juan Pablo Scarfi and Andrew Tillman (Nueva York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 2016
Since its inception in the 1880s, Pan-Americanism aimed to be a US policy of economic, legal, political, and intellectual cooperation toward Latin America. As such, it promoted the creation of continental insti- tutions of cooperation and common values, and it claimed legitimacy as a continental policy. In his pioneering book, The Western Hemisphere Idea (1954), historian Arthur Whitaker associated the rise of modern Pan-Americanism in the first three decades of the twentieth century with the institutionalization of what he termed the Western Hemisphere idea, the continental conception according to which “the peoples of this Hemisphere stand in a special relationship to one another which sets them apart from the rest of the world.” While Pan-Americanism contributed significantly to legitimizing the Western Hemisphere idea, Whitaker argued that between 1904 and 1929 there was a conflict between the hegemony of the United States in the Pan-American movement and the critical reactions that the subordination of the movement to the interests of the United States generated in Latin America. This chapter revisits this foundational and critical Pan-American moment, exploring its continental inception in the field of international law in the Americas. It thus explores the rise of American international law and Pan-American legal designs, the debates they provoked and their legacy for the Inter-American System.
Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin American History, 2016
At the moment of its founding in 1920, the League of Nations enjoyed the solid support of Latin American countries, whose early and extensive participation helped legitimize the new international system and facilitate the functioning of its institutional representation. While this support was tremendously valuable for the Geneva-based League, it continuously suffered temporary, though significant, lapses on the part of nations that were particularly representative of the region, such as Argentina, Brazil and Mexico. Despite the characteristically pacifist rhetoric enunciated by this group of states, Latin American support cannot be called disinterested or sincere. Indeed, their collaboration with the multilateral and universalistic pretensions of the League was notoriously reserved, to such an extent that in the 1920s the organization’s General Secretariat granted them special treatment and prerogatives, while simultaneously ensuring that the League would continue to exert its influence in the Western Hemisphere. This reality was confirmed, sadly, in the context of two conflicts, the Chaco and Leticia wars, during which Latin American loyalty to the League became seriously questioned. With few exceptions in the decade that followed—one characterized by complicated crises that would lead to a new worldwide conflagration—the general tendency with respect to the system of collective security described in the Society’s Charter was scarred by dissatisfaction, incompliance, and increasing disillusionment that undoubtedly contributed to the weakening and eventual collapse of this organization so emblematic of the interwar period.
This article explores economic diplomacy between the United States and Great Britain in South America during the Second World War. The dominant theme presented in the existing relevant literature on this subject is one whereby the US promoted a multilateral economic system, based on equal access to markets and resources, against the opposition of a British government determined to protect a closed trading system. The situation that arose in South America was markedly different. It was Britain that promoted multilateralism in South America, based on the belief that such a system would provide the surest means of protecting its interests in this region. The US, on the other hand, prioritised security concerns and shortterm economic gains over the promotion of a multilateral trading system in its policy towards South America. In exploring this alternative situation that arose in South America this article represents a challenge to traditional conceptions of Anglo-American economic diplomacy during World War II.
The Latin American region has been experimenting with different methods of interregional integration for most of their post-colonial history with some mixed results. In the past ten years, we have observed a proliferation of organizations and an increase in the regional political discourse toward integration. Among these new inter-regional initiatives, there is one that has received great amounts of attention: The Alianza Bolivariana Para los Pueblos de Nuestra America (ALBA). This organization is openly anti-American and was spearheaded by the governments of Cuba and Venezuela. Another incipient organization has not received much interest from the public and the media, the Alianza del Pacifico (The Pacific Alliance). This new Latin American organization is comprised by Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru.
Diplomacy&Statecraft, 2015
This analysis draws lessons about the failure of Wilsonian Pan-Americanism from an examination of the American occupation of Chiriquí, Panama, an event long neglected by historians. It argues that the Woodrow Wilson Administration missed an opportunity to demonstrate to Panamanians, and Latin Americans more generally, the benefits to be gained by accepting its tutelage and leadership in inter-American affairs. Rather than collaborate with a sympathetic Liberal regime in Panama City, Washington embarked on a unilateral mission to re-make a part of Panama in its image. The result was a surge of nationalist resistance that threatened the overthrow of the government in Panama City and hastened the end of the occupation. Chiriquí is representative of American efforts in the region before the 1930s and helps to explain Wilson's failure to build a "new world order" in the Western Hemisphere.
Historia y Sociedad, 2018
| In recent years, historians have focused on efforts at the turn of the 20th century by Alejandro Álvarez, Luis María Drago, and Baltasar Brum (all Southern Cone diplomats) to foster continental cooperation by Pan-Americanizing the Monroe Doctrine. Overlooked in this endeavor are the remarkable activities of Colombian author, journalist, and diplomat, Santiago Pérez Triana. Using primary and secondary sources, this article analyzes Pérez Triana’s support of the Drago Doctrine at the 1907 Hague Convention, his speeches at the Pan-American Financial Conference in 1915, and his essays published in Hispania, a journal that he edited between 1912 and 1916, to show how he won the respect of American and European diplomats by emerging as an influential spokesman for Pan-Americanizing the Monroe Doctrine and for hemispheric unity. Resumen | En los últimos años, los historiadores se han concentrado en los esfuerzos realizados a comienzos del siglo XX por Alejandro Álvarez, Luis María Drago ...
Ministerio de Igualdad, 2023
Ana A. Teruel (Coord.). ¿Qué fue el Éxodo Jujeño? Cartilla didáctica nivel primario. Ministerio de Educación de la Provincia de Jujuy. Unidad de Investigación en Historia Regional. FHyCS_UNJu. ISHIR-CONICET, 2012
Advances in social science, education and humanities research, 2022
Journal of High Energy Physics, 2000
Physical Review Letters, 1996
Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2006
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2022
2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2015
American Journal of Human Biology, 2016
Tissue and Cell, 1990