History tends to idealize American interventionism, painting the picture of America as brave, bold liberators, who are always acting according to the proper moral constructs. This has been true recently, of course, but it has also been true in wars that took place over the last few centuries. Various ways, though, have included some elements that were less than savory. The Spanish-America War, the Philippine-American War, and the annexation of Hawaii all brought about some unethical behavior on the part of America, and that is very much a part of the cannon of American history.
In the Spanish-American War, American ethics in justification for the war were somewhat off. Aided by the “yellow journalism” that allowed American leaders to essentially proceed without much oversight, leaders convinced the public that America needed to go to war in order to avenge the fallen soldiers who had died aboard the USS Maine. This American ship had been destroyed by fire, and it turned out that the fire originated in the ship’s boiler room. However, American leaders tricked the public into believing that Spain was the culprit. Ultimately, the US wanted to control many of the islands in the Caribbean and Pacific. In order to do so, it needed to end the Spanish Empire’s control of these islands. This is why, even when Cuba was finally granted independence, there was a condition that gave America a piece of Cuban land in order to keep a military base there. American leaders had nefarious motives and wanted to expand American influence, but they proceeded under a theory of self-defense, tricking the public into supporting an aggressive war.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"American Interventionism".
There were also some circumstances in the Philippine-American War that may have caused some to question the narrative about American purity during this era. Particularly, one of the most important incidents in the war has provided reason for Americans to take pause in considering whether the means of war have been justified by the ends. Frederick Funston was a general in the war, and he was on his way out of the military before he found a way to capture Emilio Aguinaldo, the then-president of the country. Funston had been lauded for his bravery in the event’s wake, but it turned out that he used trickery and deception, potentially violating a host of different international laws, in order to secure the capture. On top of that, Funston admitted publicly that he had tortured a host of different Filipino soldiers and prisoners during the course of the war. All of a sudden, a man who had been considered a hero was suddenly considered a shining example of everything that was wrong with the country’s new expansionism. This is what prompted writers like Mark Twain to remark about the man’s unremarkable career. In essence, they noted that Funston, along with many of his ilk, had justified a host of atrocities just because they wanted American power to be felt all over the globe.
The annexation of Hawaii has left many Hawaiians bitter, and it is suggestive of the American policy that it could just take what it wanted to take. The taking of Hawaii was led by a number of American businesspeople. They came to Hawaii, deposed the queen there, imprisoned her, and stole tremendous amounts of land owned by the queen. Once Americans figured out that they could exploit the natural resources on the island, they launched a plan to take control over even more territory in order to maximize the profit. In essence, American policies failed to respect the land ownership rights of others, and suggest an unsavory element of American policy.
- Crouch, T. W. (1969). The making of a soldier: the career of Frederick Funston, 1865-1902. University of Texas.
- Pratt, J. W. (1936). Expansionists of 1898: The Acquisition of Hawaii and the Spanish Islands. P. Smith.
