Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-12-18
American Policy in the Caribbean

one instance, in another manner in another.
1t has developed to suit the occasion through
six successive presidential administrations.
Roosevelt had Venezuela and San Domingo.
Coolidge has Nicaragua. And tie Caribbean
problem will remain to dog the footsteps and
interrupt the sweetly peaceful dreams of flu
ture occupants of the White House. 1t is a
problem that has many angles, and the policy
to deal with it it's origin to the Monroe
doctrine investment of foreign and American
capital and geography.
X * X
Some students of the American policy in the
Caribbean prefer to believe that one phase of
its modern application springs from what they
call the Roosevelt doctrine, rather than the
Monroe doctrine. for it was Roosevelt who
interpreted the Monroe doctrine to mean that
the United States must protect the investment
of foreign capital in South and Central Amer
lea well the investment of its own ma
tionals. The United States did not interpret
the Monroe doctrine to protest against SPANS
war with Chile in 1856 or MaXimilian's occupa-
ton of Mexico during the Civil War. But in
1902 when the warships of Great Britain
Italy and Germany We're threatening Vene-
zuela for that countrys failure to recognize
claims of their citizens Roosevelt interpreted
the Monroe doctrine as placing responsibility
upon the United States for seeing to it that
these claims were adjusted. Italy and Great
Britain consented to place their claims in the
AAeiido VI d uIiAeu COIIlIHlSSIOn, out deFHldny
delay in following suit brought forth Roose.
velt's cryptic ultimatum; within 48 hours
there must be an offer to arbitrate or Dewey
will sail with The orders indicated"
Since that time the United States has ap.
piled the Roosevelt doctrine in connection with
an accepted principle of interna tional law viz.
the right of a state to reprisas in collect
ing debts owed to it's citizens by another state
Many do not believe that the Monroe doctrine
hgures in it at all. In 1924 for instance, DR..
J.. s. Rowe, the director general of the Pan
American Union, stated in the course of an
address at Williamstown: There is no obi
cation under the Monroe doctrine for the use
of the Army Navy of the United States to
collect loans of Latin American governments
made by foreign bankers" But Albert Straus
Of New York gave the bankers viewpoint when
he declared: IF European nations are to re.
spect our policy which keeps them from an.
plying physical force to recalcitrant debtors
in the Americas, they will naturally expect ne
to see that the engagements OF such debtors
are met and our Government must, therefore
IN appropriate cases be prepared to assume
responsibility to that end or be content to
allow foreign governments to apply pressure
as they see fit in their own way" Mr. STRAINS
merely echoed declaration of President Roose
welt, who 20 years before had said: 81 do NOT
want to see any foreign government take nos
session permanently temporarily of the
customs houses of any American repubIic in
order TO enforce its obligations, and the alter.
natlVe may at any time be that we shall be
forced to do ourselves"
From 1898 to the present time the limited
States has been landing troops in Latin Amer
lcan countries, but the protection of American
ana foreign investments has not been the onlv
cause Troops have been landed for strategic
necessity; to quell acts of bandtry and disor.
oer. ana they have been put ashore at the
invitation of the governments concerned
X X X X
AFTER the Spanish-Amercan War the
states became a world power Instead of
debtor nation. it has been for the
greater part of its life, it became creditor
nation Instead of having to struggle for
supremacy in foreign markets. it found it's
natural markets near at hand in the Western
hemisphere, with all interests-political mil.
l'ary' commercial and financial-combning to
give it predominating influence Command
continued on Third Page)