Monroe Doctrine Essay, Research Paper

Monroe Doctrine

The Monroe Doctrine can be considered as the United States foremost major declaration to the universe as a reasonably new state. The Monroe Doctrine was a statement of United States policy on the activity and rights of powers in the Western Hemisphere during the early to mid 1800s. The philosophy established the United States place in the major universe personal businesss of the clip.

Around the clip of the Napoleonic Wars in the 1820s, Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Colombia all gained their independency from Spanish control ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) . The United States was the first state to acknowledge their independency from Spain. The European powers had still considered the new states as still belonging to Spain. The Americans had a sense of pride in the former Spanish settlements deriving independency. They felt as if the American Revolution was a theoretical account for these new Latin American states ( Faragher 265 ) .

After Napoleon went down, the monarchy in Spain regained power ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) . The Spanish had felt embarrassed after losing their settlements to independence. In 1815 Tsar Alexander I of Russia and the sovereign of Austria and Prussia formed the Holy Alliance. This confederation was a group set out to keep autarchy ( Migill 594 ) . Spain so demanded the return of its settlements of the New World ( Migill 594 ) . With the possibility of aid from the Holy Alliance and France, Spain? s end was looking realistic. The Americans besides feared that if the Spanish settlements were recaptured the United States might be following ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) .

Great Britain refused to allow the Spanish take back their now independent settlements. As free states the new Spanish-American states could merchandise more goods with Great Britain. However, if Spain regains control of their former settlements so merchandise with Great Britain would diminish drastically ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) .

The Russian Tsar attempted to widen his involvement of enlargement in North America. In 1821 Russia had claims on the North Western seashore of the North American continent every bit low as the 51st analogue, deep into the Oregon Territory ( Migill 595 ) . On September 14th of the same twelvemonth Tsar Alexander I issued an Imperial Ukase ( edict ) , stating that no foreign vass could come within 100 Italian stat mis of Russian district. Although the edict was ne’er enforced, John Quincy Adams, the Secretary of State at the clip, strongly opposed it. Adams felt that many parts of North America were still undiscovered such as Alaska and North Western Canada. On July 17th, 1823 John Q Adams declared that the United States should contend Russia? s Imperial Ukase on the North American continent. President James Monroe accepted John Q Adams? statement and would travel on to utilize it in his message ( Perkins 31 ) .

The British and the Americans both had grounds to maintain the Holy Alliance out of the New World. So, why non a joint declaration? George Canning, a British Foreign Minister and a representative of British trading involvements, sent a message to the United States on August 20th, 1823. He said that Spain would ne’er retrieve their settlements, merely clip will let the new states to be recognized and that England does non desire the settlements nor wants to see anyone else take control of them ( Perkins 37 ) .

Richard Rush, an American Minister, had been asked the inquiry, by George Canning, if he could do a joint declaration between the United States and Great Britain. Rush was startled by Caning? s proposition, since it had been merely 40 old ages since the American Revolution and the War of 1812 was merely awhile back ( May 3 ) . At first without confer withing John Q. Adams he had agreed to. President Monroe favored this thought along with former presidents Jefferson and Madison. Jefferson had said with Great Britain, ? on our side, we non fear the universe? ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) .

Although Great Britain and the United States were on the same path, they had differences. The United States had recognized the settlements as new states and Great Britain had non ( Perkins 37 ) . George Canning said that Great Britain would utilize their powerful Royal Navy to halt European intercession whether or non they had a joint declaration ( ? Monroe Doctrine? 617 ) . Then on October 12th, 1823 Canning had a figure of meetings with Prince Jules de Polignac who was a Gallic embassador in London. Their meetings concluded with the Polignac Memorandum, stating that France would non assist Spain recover her lost settlements. All of this hindered the action toward cooperation. John Q. Adams had opposed the issue of a joint statement with the British ( Migill 595 ) . Adams asked, ? Why should the United States appear as a cockboat in the aftermath of a British ship of the line? ? ( Perkins 51 ) . With the guaranteed backup of the British Royal Navy and the Polignac Memorandum the United States did non necessitate the British in the statement. The United States would non hold to portion the glorification with the British. Monroe, convinced

by Adams? statements, agreed to travel on their ain. Caning twice on September 18th and 26th offered once more and twice the United States turned him down. Canning had suggested that Great Britain might assure future acknowledgment of independent states but that did non convert the Americans ( Perkins 39 ) .

On December 2nd, 1823 President James Monroe made his most celebrated message to congress ( Williams 135 ) . The Monroe Doctrine was aimed chiefly at the states of Spain and Russia. It consisted of three chief parts. First the philosophy specifically states that, ? ? we ( US ) should see any effort on their ( European Powers ) portion to widen their system to any part of this hemisphere every bit unsafe to our peace and safety. ? The President made it clear to Europe that the United States would travel against any effort to take control of any independent state of the New World. The message goes on to state, ? In the wars of the European Powers in affairs associating to themselves we have ne’er taken any portion, nor does is comport with our policy so to make. It is merely when our rights are invaded or earnestly menaced that we resent hurts or do readyings for our defense. ? This lets the European states know that the United States would non interfere with European personal businesss, such as commanding of bing settlements, unless the United States was endangered ( Monroe 395 ) . Finally the message ends by saying that the United States would non take sides in European statements but the state of Europe must non interrupt the Western Hemisphere ( Migill 594 ) .

In 1823 the United States had no where near the armed forces and economic power to back up such a powerful statement. Adams had questioned whether the United States would travel to war if Spain acted toward ill will toward Latin America ( Perkins 44 ) . President Monroe had his uncertainties but responded by stating, ? It is written and I will non alter it now? ( Perkins 45 ) . The European Powers were truly kept out of the New World due to the Royal Navy of the British. By the 20th century the United States had the power to implement the philosophy ( Faragher 265 ) .

The Monroe Doctrine has been used and referred on many occasions from when it was written up to present times. It has become a much greater significance since 1823. The Doctrine was foremost put to work against Russia in the Convention of 1824 ( Faragher 265 ) . As a consequence of the Doctrine, Russians gave up the Oregon district, was limited to 54 & # 176 ; 40 analogue and American trade was allowed to run in Russian district on the North American Continent ( Perkins 31 ) . In December of 1904 President Theodore Roosevelt added a corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. The corollary said that the United States would non interfere with Latin American states that conducted their personal businesss in a well-mannered manner, but if non the United States would step in and move as an international police officers ( Migill 595 ) . However, in 1930 President Hoover created the Clark Memorandum antagonizing the Roosevelt Corollary. This abjured any right of the United States to step in in Latin American personal businesss. It claimed that the Monroe Doctrine would be applied entirely for its original intent, to protect Latin America from European intervention. An other clip the United States interfered in Latin America was in 1965. President Linden B. Johnson ordered US military personnels into the Dominica Republic to halt a return over by a Communist authorities ( Migill 596 ) .

The Monroe Doctrine besides set up farther protection of United States involvement. The Carter Doctrine, by President Jimmy Carter, was modeled after the Monroe Doctrine. The Carter Doctrine was aimed to protest United States claim in the Persian Gulf. It was in response to the Soviet Union? s effort to obtain a warm H2O port in the Persian Gulf country. The Untied States wanted to protect this country from the Soviet Union due to the fact that the Persian Gulf is rich in oil sedimentations, which is important to the United States economic system ( Faragher 992 ) .

The Americans felt secure, optimistic, and chauvinistic in the early 1820s. They boasted that their political construction was superior to autarchy of the European powers and the Monroe Doctrine was a message that let Europe cognize this.

Bibliography

Work Cited

Faragher, John Mack. Out of Many One: a history of the American people. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1997.

May, Ernest R. The Making of the Monroe Doctrine. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1975.

Migill, Frank N, erectile dysfunction. Great Events from History. Unknown-1830. Englewood Cliffs: Salem Press, 1975

? Monroe Doctrine. ? The World Book Encyclopedia. 1984 erectile dysfunction.

Monroe, James. ? Monroe Doctrine. ? 2 December 1823. A History of the Monroe Doctrine. Ed. Dexter Perkins. Toronto: Small, Brown and Company, 1955. 394-6.

Perkins, Dexter. A History of the Monroe Doctrine. Toronto: Small, Brown and Company, 1955.

Williams, Harry T. The History of American Wars. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1981.