Throughout the Cold War, the United States main doctrine was that of containment, the threat of Communist expansion needed to be counter-act regardless of the cost to life and property (Davila 1950). In South America this was no exception, the United States (along with Western allies such as France, Spain, and Canada who on some instances intervened) would often work to destabilize and depose various governments, some democratic and liberal in nature, for political and social aims (Davila 1961). This included states such Argentina, Chile, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, and Haiti (Davila 1942). The motives for these interventions and regime changes, as clearly stated by the United States government during the 1990 invasion of Panama, was to “defend
…show more content…
publicly admits to these actions. As previously noted, when the U.S. invaded Panama from 1989-1990, their primary justification was to remove the military dictator Manuel Noriega, protect the democratic process within Panama that Noriega had stripped Panama of in 1983 (Davila 1977). This was stated as the primary objective, despite clear evidence that the invasion was carried out to protect American interests, specifically securing American shipping through the Panama Canal (Schmitz 166). The double-standard and blatant hypocrisy in this instance is nearly comical. Noriega, the dictator of Panama, had been a well-known weapons and drugs smuggler for the U.S. and C.I.A, used since the 1950’s to fund various anti-communist insurgencies (Noriega & US Government). His rise to power was funded by the U.S. and C.I.A as he was seen as a useful and loyal ally whose routine usage of brutal political repression would help to keep Panama safe from communist and anti-American influence (Noriega & US Government). Despite clear evidence of this, the U.S. continued its support for Noriega as he would give special rights and privileges to the U.S. government and American companies. American support for Noriega only ended after the 1989 election when Guillermo Endara, the clear winner of the election was shown being dragged out of his motorcade and beaten by pro-Noriega
publicly admits to these actions. As previously noted, when the U.S. invaded Panama from 1989-1990, their primary justification was to remove the military dictator Manuel Noriega, protect the democratic process within Panama that Noriega had stripped Panama of in 1983 (Davila 1977). This was stated as the primary objective, despite clear evidence that the invasion was carried out to protect American interests, specifically securing American shipping through the Panama Canal (Schmitz 166). The double-standard and blatant hypocrisy in this instance is nearly comical. Noriega, the dictator of Panama, had been a well-known weapons and drugs smuggler for the U.S. and C.I.A, used since the 1950’s to fund various anti-communist insurgencies (Noriega & US Government). His rise to power was funded by the U.S. and C.I.A as he was seen as a useful and loyal ally whose routine usage of brutal political repression would help to keep Panama safe from communist and anti-American influence (Noriega & US Government). Despite clear evidence of this, the U.S. continued its support for Noriega as he would give special rights and privileges to the U.S. government and American companies. American support for Noriega only ended after the 1989 election when Guillermo Endara, the clear winner of the election was shown being dragged out of his motorcade and beaten by pro-Noriega