A. Plan of The Investigation
This investigation asks the question: to what extent did the United States fail to implement the policies set forth in the Monroe Doctrine during the fifty years after it was issued? The investigation will be carried out by evaluating the policies of the Monroe Doctrine as well as analyzing the shortcomings and the failures of it. The policies of the Monroe Doctrine will be evaluated by how effective they were overall and the extent to which they changed over time. The analysis of failures will consist of discussion of specific events in which the United States failed to implement the policies of the Doctrine.
Word Count: 100
B. Summary of Evidence
The Monroe Doctrine was created to ensure that European powers would have no influence over the independence of countries in the western hemisphere of the world. Whether the Doctrine was constantly implemented or not is debatable, but the commonly held opinion is that it was generally successful in preventing European colonization of the Americas. Over the time period the policies of the Doctrine have existed, it has created much conflict with other countries as well as with citizens of the United States. Gaston Nerval argues in his book Autopsy of The Monroe Doctrine that “There was no problem with Pan Americanism, political or economic, which had not been, in one way or another, at one time or another, related to the Monroe doctrine or one of its multiple derivatives.”(v). The reasons for the Doctrine’s existence as a center of conflict can be split into the issues of its transformation over time and the instances in which the US did or did not implement it. During the nineteenth century, the Monroe Doctrine had multiple additions “extending it to cases not originally contemplated by it” (Alvarez 17). These cases include that the United States could oppose European acquisition of Latin American land even with Latin American approval and that they could oppose permanent European occupation as result of war. With the Doctrine ever-changing to fit whatever conflict in the Americas that head the US’s way, how would other countries see it? A.B. Hall claims that the document saw little resistance from Europe because of a delicate balance of powers and “the lack of sufficient incentive to compel a nation to face American opposition…and jealous rivalries in Europe.” (125). If one country went out against the Monroe Doctrine because of its failures or injustices, who is to say that other countries would support those countries against the US? Hall lists the example of England “who has been friendly to the doctrine when applied to other European Powers, has officially declared that it does not have the binding quality of law and this position has received the support of every European power” (112). If the Doctrine that defends against European Powers isn’t accepted by those same European Countries, how can it ever be carried out effectively? The credibility...