2. WHAT WERE THE CAUSES FOR WAR IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY LATIN AMERICA? The Haitian War for Independence (1791-1803) began as a struggle between the privileged white planters and the less privileged affranchis (those of mixed blood) and rapidly became an all-out race war when the third and largest racial element, the pure blacks, ultimately dominated. In 1791 the affranchis sought the liberties given to all citizens by the French Revolution. During the early years of the bloody warfare, some wealthy plantation owners were able to escape from Haiti with their slaves, contributing to the spread of race as a cause for conflict, particularly in neighboring Cuba. Conflicts in other areas of Latin America have also had racial overtones, but none equaled the extremes of the Caribbean experience. The American Revolution (1775-1783), which had had the support of Spain, and the French Revolution (1789-1799) provided models. These influenced some of the privileged of the New World, the two most important being Simon Bolivar of New Granada and Miguel Hidalgo of Mexico.
3. Carlos III, who came to the throne in 1759, initiated reforms that were contrary to Spanish traditions and practices. In 1807 Ferdinand, the presumptive successor to the throne of Spain, unsuccessfully attempted to take control of the crown. His father, Carlos IV, had abdicated because of a popular rising in Aranjuez and the hostility of the Spanish people toward his prime minister Godoy, who was also the queen's lover. Members of the entourage of the abdicated king turned to Napoleon Bonaparte for help. Skillfully taking advantage of the situation, Napoleon forced Carlos to sign the Treaty of Bayonne which ceded the throne to Napoleon. Ferdinand Vll's dream of regaining territory in the Americas died hard in spite of its improbability of success. His aspirations were aided by counterrevolutionary forces in Europe. Following Ferdinand's restoration the crowned heads discussed extending aid to the Spanish king so he might retake his lost empire in the Americas. Although this alliance did not endure, Spain persisted in its dream of reconquest. It invaded Mexico in 1829; welcomed the invitation to reintroduce colonial rule in Santo Domingo in 1861; and fought Chile and Peru (and also nominally Bolivia and Ecuador) in 1865-66. To some degree these adventures were motivated by the desire to reconquer lost colonies. Spain was not the only nation that was inspired to renew the wars for independence. Fear of Spain caused a few Latin American nations to consider an attack against the remaining empire. In 1826 Colombia and Mexico toyed with the idea of forging a coalition in order to liberate Cuba from Spanish rule. During the Pacific War (1865-66), Peruvian President Ignacio Prado hired a former officer of the Confederate States Navy to command an attack against Cuba. Although none of these efforts to reignite the wars for independence were ever serious threats to their opponents, they nonetheless absorbed treasure.
4. Not all wars for independence within Latin America were against the European monarch. Some were caused by the heterogeneity within the vast viceregal governments. Another factor that caused regions within a viceregal colony to seek independence from the colonial seat of power was economic competition within that colony. The War of the Triple Alliance (1864-70) was also a war for territorial conquest. Francisco Solano Lopez probably dreamed of an "Empire of the Rio de la Plata" composed of Paraguay, parts of Argentina and Brazil, plus Uruguay. Although no documentation exists outlining his plan, it is hard to draw any other conclusion from his actions, and Lopez did have a wooden model of an imperial crown made in Paris. The most bloody were the French intervention in Mexico (1861-67) in support of the Mexican Conservatives and the Brazilian Civil War of 1893-94. Other political ideologies, such as federalism versus centralism, as well as economic disputes among the ruling class also sparked intraclass wars. The scale of these conflicts ranged from palace coups involving a few dozen people to full-scale wars involving armies of many thousands. Latin American nations won their independence by 1824. For decades regionalism and factionalism dominated. Within these environments, precarious oligarchies and dictatorial caudillos agreed to usurous loans from private American and European investors who insisted upon exorbitant profits to justify the risk. And many foreign merchants flocked to Latin America to exploit commercial opportunities. These individuals were frequently endangered by the lack of political stability.
5. The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 did outline a policy for intervention in Latin America in order to prevent a monarchic counterrevolution against republican governments and to deter the expansion of European colonies in the New World. The first threat never materialized and the second too frequently was carried out by Great Britain, the world's dominant military power. Americans and British fought on both sides in the 1826-28 war between the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata (the future Argentina) and Brazil. French and Italians fought in the siege of Montevideo against the forces of Manuel Rosas. Belgians and Austrians fought against Mexicans during the French intervention. Swiss, Germans, and Italians fought as volunteers and mercenaries in the Argentine army against Francisco Solano L6pez during the War of the Triple Alliance. Religion played an important role in Latin American wars. Fathers like Miguel Hidalgo and Jose Morelos, who led the War for Independence in Mexico, are but the most prominent examples of a significant number of clerics who took up the saber. Rafael Carrera's army, which controlled Guatemala for the Conservatives in the mid-nineteenth century, was a product of the Roman Catholic Church. Ecuador under Gabriel Garcia Moreno (1860-95) was an almost theocratic state; those who fought the civil war which ended his policies were significantly motivated by anti-religion. Religion was a prime motivator during the intraclass struggles that plagued Colombia during the last seven decades of the nineteenth century. These ten causes for war in Latin America-race war, the ideology of independence, the controversy of separation versus union, boundary disputes, territorial conquests, caudilloism, resource wars, intraclass struggles, interventions caused by capitalism, and religious wars-were intertwined and profoundly influenced the region throughout the nineteenth century. And war was pervasive
6. Part 3: Ch.15- Mexico: The Umbilical Cord The north American Free trade Agreement(NAFTA) was supposed to propel Mexico into the first world, January 1, 1994, the Zapatista National Liberation Army marginalized farmers, seizing four southern municipalities and assassinating two leaders of the governing PRI Party. President Carlos Salinas responded by unleashing a brutal crackdown against the Zapatistas and thousands of their peasants. Joining NAFTA has inevitably meant Mexico abdication of any pretension to lead an independent Latin America, Mexico now lies forever under America’s strategic umbrella even though fences are up to separate them. It will require more than Laissez-faire NAFTA-onmics to make one country out of Mexico. America’s most magnanimous gesture toward Mexico was bailing out the Peso during 1994 financial crisis, but since then NAFTA has fallen far short of what the EU has done for Turkey.
7. Ch. 16- Venezuela: Bolivar’s Revenge South America from Spanish rule in the early 19th century, the daring anticolonial revolutionary Simon Bolivar dreamed incessantly of continental unity. But his Gran Columbia soon splintered into numerous revolutionary republics, leaving Latin America without a single pole of power. Venezuela without oil would be just another third-world agricultural backwater with populist leaders and the occasional coup, but Venezuela with oil is something different. It would become a major energy provider, a regional success story of balanced governance and development and a diplomatic catalyst to finally achieve Bolivar’s dream. The naturalist explorer Alexander von Humboldt praised Venezuela's eternal Spring, but actually suffers from acute case of bad latitude. After World War II, middle-class Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese merchants and workers considered Venezuela a land of opportunity.
8. Ch. 17- Colombia: The Andean Balkans There are three political poles of power vying for control in the various cities and rural spaces: the government and its army , drug-trafficking rebels and paramilitary groups. The U.S. has been a strong ally to South America. The Andean war on drugs and the Bolivarian integrationist quest now exist side by side in a micro level contest of roads, tunnels, and pipelines. Columbia appears to be succeeding in reversing the damage of its recent drug boom. The 1990 approach to dealing with the drug trade was characterized by melancholy resignation.
9. Ch. 18- Brazil: The Southern Pole Brazil is South American’s magnet, attracting labor and investment from all sides. Brazil’s global role is based purely on its environmental resources and its massive economy and Latin America's geopolitical ambitions in turn depend almost entirely on Brazil. Exports nearing $100 billion per year, agricultural actually accounts for only 10 percent of Brazil’s economy. It has taken 3 revolutions for Brazil to become Latin America’s great power. Brazil has always looked multidirectional, persevering in its quest to become the anchor of Latin Diplomacy.
10. Brazilian presidential election, 2010 The Brazilian presidential election was held in 2010 with two rounds of balloting. The first round was held on October 3 along with other elections as part of the 2010 general election. As no presidential candidate polled 50 percent of the vote on October 3, a runoff was held on October 31 between DilmaRousseff and Jose Serra Rousseff won with 56% of the second round vote. The election determined the successor to President LuizInácio Lula da Silva, of the Workers' Party. According to the Constitution, the president is elected directly for a four-year term, with a limit of two consecutive terms. Lula was thus not eligible to stand again as he has already served two terms after winning the elections in 2002 and was re-elected in 2006. This was the first time since the inaugural presidential election after the military dictatorship that he did not run for President.
11. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva Inácio Lula da Silva born 27 October 1945, but registered with a date of birth of October 6, 1945, known popularly as Lula, served as the 35thPresident of Brazil from 2003 to 2011. A founding member of the Workers' Party he ran for President three times unsuccessfully, first in the 1989 election. Lula achieved victory in the 2002 election, and was inaugurated as President on 1 January 2003. In the 2006 election he was re-elected for a second term as President, which ended on 1 January 2011. He was succeeded by his former Chief of Staff, DilmaRousseff. He is often regarded as the most popular politician in the history of Brazil and, at the time of his mandate, one of the most popular in the world. Social programs like BolsaFamília and FomeZeroare hallmarks of his time in office. Lula played a prominent role in recent international relations developments, including the Nuclear program of Iran and global warming, and was described as "a man with audacious ambitions to alter the balance of power among nations."He was featured in Time's The 100 Most Influential People in the World for 2010.
