| History of the United States expansion and influence |
|---|
| Colonialism |
| Militarism |
| Foreign policy |
|
| Concepts |
The participation of the United States inregime change inLatin America involved U.S.-backedcoup d'états which were aimed at replacingleft-wing leaders withright-wing ones,military juntas, orauthoritarian regimes.[1][2] Intervention of an economic and military variety was prevalent during theCold War (1947–1991). Although originally in line with theTruman Doctrine (1947) ofcontainment, United States involvement in regime change increased following the drafting ofNSC 68 (1950), which advocated more aggressive actions against potential Soviet allies.[3]
In the early 20th century, during the "Banana Republic" era ofLatin American history, the U.S. launched several interventions and invasions in the region (known as theBanana Wars) in order to promote American business interests.[1] United States influenced regime change in this period of Latin American history which started after the signing of theTreaty of Paris in the wake of theSpanish–American War. Cuba gained its independence, whilePuerto Rico was annexed by the United States.[4] Expansive and imperialist U.S. foreign policy combined with new economic prospects led to increased U.S. intervention in Latin America from 1898 to the early 1930s.[5] Continued activities lasted into the late 20th century.
In Argentina, military forces overthrew thedemocratically electedPresidentIsabel Perón in the1976 Argentine coup d'état, starting the military dictatorship of GeneralJorge Rafael Videla, known as theNational Reorganization Process. The coup was accepted and tacitly supported by theFord administration[6] and theU.S. government had close relations with the ensuing authoritarian regime, withU.S. Secretary of StateHenry Kissinger paying several official visits to Argentina during the dictatorship.[7][8][9]Videla andEmilio Eduardo Massera were graduates of theSchool of Americas, which according to CongressmanJoseph P. Kennedy II was "...a school that has run more dictators than any other school in the history of the world."[10][11][12]
The U.S. government supported the1971 coup led by GeneralHugo Banzer that toppled PresidentJuan José Torres ofBolivia.[13] Torres had displeased Washington by convening an "Asamblea del Pueblo" (People's Assembly), in which representatives of specificproletarian sectors of society were represented (miners, unionizedteachers, students,peasants), and more generally by leading the country in what was perceived as a left wing direction. Banzer hatched a bloody military uprising starting on August 18, 1971, that succeeded in taking the reins of power by August 22, 1971. After Banzer took power, the U.S. provided extensive military and other aid to the Banzer dictatorship.[14][15] Torres, who had fled Bolivia, was kidnapped and assassinated in 1976 as part ofOperation Condor, the U.S.-supported campaign ofpolitical repression andstate terrorism bySouth Americanright-wing dictators.[16][17][18]
Brazil experienced several decades ofauthoritarian governments, especially after the U.S.-backed[19]1964 Brazilian coup d'état againstsocial democratJoão Goulart. Under then-PresidentJohn F. Kennedy, the U.S. sought to "prevent Brazil from becoming another China or Cuba", a policy which was carried forward underLyndon B. Johnson and which led to U.S. military support for the coup in April 1964.[20][21] According toVincent Bevins, the topping of João Goulart was one of the most significant victories for the U.S. during the Cold War, as the military dictatorship established in Brazil, the fifth most populous nation in the world, "played a crucial role in pushing the rest of South America into the pro-Washington,anticommunist group of nations."[2]
After thedemocratic election ofPresidentSalvador Allende in 1970, aneconomic war ordered by PresidentRichard Nixon,[22] among other things, caused the1973 Chilean coup d'état with theinvolvement of the CIA[18] due to Allende'sdemocratic socialist leanings. What followed was the 17 year-long U.S.-backedmilitary dictatorship ofAugusto Pinochet.[23] In 1988, apresidential referendum was held in order to confirm Pinochet's rule for 8 more years. The oppositionalConcertation of Parties for Democracy endorsed the "No" option, winning the referendum and ending Pinochet's rule democratically. After that, free elections were held in1989 with Concertation winning again.[24][25][26]
A declassified report from the U.S. government "Annex-NSSM 97" details the plan developed in 1970 to overthrow Allende were he to take office.[27] The document explicitly states that the U.S. government's role should not be revealed and would primarily use Chilean institutions as a means of ousting the president. The Chilean military is highlighted as the best means to achieve this goal. The benefits of a coup initiated by the military are to reduce the threat ofMarxism in Latin America and to disarm a potential threat to the United States.[28]
During the late 1800s, the U.S. sought to expand its economic interests by developing an economy overseas.[29] This sentiment helped expand support for theSpanish–American War and Cuban liberation despite the U.S. previously establishing itself as anti-independence and revolution.[29] America's victory in the war ended Spanish rule over Cuba, but promptly replaced it with American military occupation of the island from1898–1902.[30]
After the end of the military occupation in 1902, the U.S. continued to exert significant influence over Cuba with policies like thePlatt Amendment.[31] In subsequent years American forces regularly invaded and intervened in Cuba, with the U.S. military occupying Cuba again from1906–1909, and U.S. marines beingsent to Cuba from 1917 to 1922 to protect American-owned sugar plantations.[32]: 74 The United States also supported Cuban dictatorFulgencio Batista as his policies benefited American business interests.[33]
After theCuban Revolution andFidel Castro's rise to power, American relations with Cuba became increasingly hostile. American forces trained, supplied, and supported theCuban exiles who attempted to overthrow Castro in theBay of Pigs Invasion of 1961, but the invasion was defeated and Castro retained control. In subsequent decades, American intelligence operatives madenumerous attempts to assassinate Castro, but these ultimately failed as well.
In May 1961, the ruler of theDominican Republic, right-wing dictatorRafael Trujillo, was murdered with weapons supplied by the United StatesCentral Intelligence Agency (CIA).[34][35] An internal CIAmemorandum states that a 1973Office of Inspector General investigation into the murder disclosed "quite extensive Agency involvement with the plotters". The CIA described its role in "changing" the government of theDominican Republic as a 'success' in that it assisted in moving the Dominican Republic from a totalitarian dictatorship to a Western-style democracy.[36][37] SocialistJuan Bosch, whose propaganda and institute for political training had received some CIA funding via the J. M. Kaplan Fund, was elected president of the Dominican Republic in its first free elections, in December 1962. Bosch was deposed by a right-wingcoup in September 1963. U.S. president Lyndon Johnson intervened into the 1965Dominican Civil War by sending American troops to help end the war and prevent supporters of the deposed Bosch from taking over. On July 1, 1966, elections were held withJoaquín Balaguer winning against Bosch.[38]
Between 1960 and 1963, the CIA conducted operations in Ecuador using agentPhilip Agee. After PresidentJosé María Velasco Ibarra denied breaking relations with Cuba, the CIA began efforts to overthrow him. In November 1961, Velasco was overthrown in a military coup and replaced by his vice president,Carlos Julio Arosemena Monroy. President Arosemena turned out to be less than favorable to the United States, causing the CIA to adopt the same destabilizing tactics against his government. On July 11, 1963, Arosemena was overthrown by anothermilitary coup. TheEcuadorian junta, supported by the United States government, adopted anti-communist policies and banned theCommunist Party of Ecuador (PCE).[39][40][41]
Peasants and workers (mostly of indigenous descent) revolted during the first half of the 20th century due to harsh living conditions and the abuse from landlords and the government-supported AmericanUnited Fruit Company (or UFCO). This revolt was repressed but led to the democratic election ofJacobo Árbenz. During his presidency, Árbenz aimed to address some of the tensions between Guatemalans and the United Fruit Company, includingland reform, breaking UFCO's monopoly on transportation in Guatemala, and the creation of an electrical generating station, as UFCO owned and controlled this utility in the capital city.[42] Arbenz passed the Agrarian Reform Law, where 234,000 acres of land that UFCO owned but was not cultivated would be expropriated for redistribution to Guatemalans.[42] In response, the United Fruit Company began heavily lobbying the U.S. government for intervention. UFCO had tight ties with the Eisenhower administration, includingAllen Dulles (head of the CIA) and brotherJohn Foster Dulles (Secretary of State) who had represented UFCO through their law firm, as well as Ed Whitman (husband of Eisenhower's secretaryAnn Whitman) who was UFCO's public relations officer.[42]
Árbenz was overthrown during the1954 Guatemalan coup d'état, endorsed by the United States.[43]
The United States had been interested in controlling Haiti in the decades following itsindependence from France in the early nineteenth century.[44] By the twentieth century, the United States had become Haiti's largest trade partner, replacing France, with American businesses expanding their presence in Haiti.[45] Businesses from the United States had pursued the control of Haiti for years and in 1909, the new president ofNational City Bank of New York,Frank A. Vanderlip, began to plan the bank's take over of Haiti's finances as part of his larger role of making the bank grow in international markets.[46][47][48] From 1910 to 1911, theUnited States Department of State backed a consortium of American investors – headed by theNational City Bank of New York – to acquire a managing stake of the National Bank of Haiti to create theBank of the Republic of Haiti (BNRH), with the new bank often holding payments from the Haitian government, leading to unrest.[47][49][50][51] American diplomats ultimately drafted plans to take over Haiti's finances, dubbed the "Farnham Plan", named after the vice president of National City Bank,Roger Leslie Farnham.[51]
Haitian opposition to the plan resulted with the BNRH withheld funds from the Haitian government and funded rebels to destabilize the Haitian government in order to justify American intervention, generating 12% gains in interest by holding on to the funds.[51][52] When thecaco-supported anti-AmericanRosalvo Bobo emerged as the next president of Haiti in 1915 following the lynching of PresidentVilbrun Guillaume Sam, who was killed after executing hundreds of political opponents, the United States government decided to act quickly to preserve its economic dominance andinvaded Haiti.[53] During the occupation, Haiti had three new presidents, though theUnited States ruled as amilitary regime throughmartial law led by Marines and the Gendarmerie. Two major rebellions against the occupation occurred, resulting in several thousand Haitians killed, and numerous human rights violations – includingtorture andsummary executions – being perpetrated by Marines and the Gendarmerie.[44][51][54][55][56] Acorvée system offorced labor was used by the United States forinfrastructure projects, that resulted in hundreds to thousands of deaths.[51][56] Under the occupation, most Haitians continued to live in poverty, while American personnel were well-compensated.[57] The U.S. retained influence on Haiti's external finances until 1947, as per the 1919 treaty that required an American financial advisor through the life of Haiti's acquired loan.[58][59]
Henry Lane Wilson, U.S. ambassador to Mexico underWilliam Howard Taft, actively supported theTen Tragic Days coup which overthrew the democratically elected president,Francisco I. Madero. Soon after taking office, U.S. presidentWoodrow Wilson dismissed the ambassador and refused to recognize the Mexican government ofVictoriano Huerta, who had seized power in the coup. This led to theUnited States occupation of Veracruz in 1914 and continued instability in Mexico.
In 1912, during theBanana Wars period, the U.S.occupied Nicaragua as a means of protecting American business interests and protecting the rights that Nicaragua granted to the United States toconstruct a canal there.[60] At the same time, the United States and Mexican governments competed for political influence in Central America. As a result, the U.S. government intervened more directly in Nicaraguan affairs in two separate but related incidents in 1911 and 1912, with the objective of ensuring the rule of a government friendly to U.S. political and commercial interests and preserving political stability in Central America. Although officials within the administration of PresidentWilliam H. Taft saw themselves as intervening to ensure good government, many Nicaraguans became increasingly alarmed at what seemed to be a foreign takeover of their political, banking, and railroad systems.[61] The intervention, utilizing theU.S. Marine Corps, was sparked by a rebellion that opposed the United States. After quelling the rebellion, the U.S. continued occupying Nicaragua until 1933, when PresidentHerbert Hoover officially ended the occupation.[62]
Increasing tensions betweenManuel Noriega's dictatorship and the U.S. government led to theUnited States invasion of Panama in 1989, which ended in Noriega's overthrow.[63] The United States invasion of Panama can be seen as a rare example ofdemocratization byforeign-imposed regime change which was effective long-term.[64]
.jpg)
In whatThe New York Times described as "Washington’s most overt attempts in decades to carry out regime change in Latin America", the administration of PresidentDonald Trump made an attempt of regime change in an effort to remove PresidentNicolás Maduro from office during theVenezuelan presidential crisis.[65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][excessive citations] TheCongressional Research Service of theUnited States Congress wrote: "Although the Trump Administration initially discussed the possibility of using military force in Venezuela, it ultimately sought to compel Maduro to leave office through diplomatic, economic, and legal pressure."[77] According to Marc Becker, a Latin American history professor ofTruman State University, the claim of the presidency byJuan Guaidó "was part of a U.S.-backed maximum-pressure campaign for regime change that empowered an extremist faction of the country's opposition while simultaneously destroying the economy with sanctions."[67] Economist Agathe Demarais made similar statements in her bookBackfire: How Sanctions Reshape the World Against U.S. Interests, saying that the United States held the belief that regime change was attainable and that sanctions were implemented against Venezuela to hasten the establishment of Guaidó.[68]Jacobin wrote that the corporate-friendly Guaidó movement was meant to take power after a coup supported by the United States removed President Maduro from office.[78] Ahumada Beltrán said that the Trump administration participated in an "open campaign" to overthrow Maduro with a goal to establish American control over oil and to re-establish Venezuela's traditional elite class.[71]
U.S. officials met with members of theNational Bolivarian Armed Forces of Venezuela from 2017 to 2018 to discuss coup plans, though discussions ceased after information leaked and some of the plotters were arrested prior to their anticipated actions during the2018 Venezuelan presidential election.[79] May 2018 presidential elections in Venezuela were boycotted by the opposition and Maduro won amid low turnout; the United States, the European Union, and other nations refused to recognize the elections, saying they were fraudulent.[80] National Security AdvisorJohn Bolton said in a November 1, 2018, speech prior to the2018 United States elections that the Trump administration would confront a "troika of tyranny" and remove leftist governments in Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela;[81][69] Trump officials spoke to the media about an existing plan to overthrow Maduro, limiting oil exports to Cuba to create economic distress which would prompt its government's removal and then to finally target Nicaragua.[69][82]
In January 2019,Leopoldo López'sPopular Will party attained the leadership of theNational Assembly of Venezuela according to a rotation agreement made by opposition parties, namingJuan Guaidó as president of the legislative body.[83] Days after Guaidó was sworn in, he and López reached out to theUnited States Department of State and presented the idea that Guaidó would be named interim president and that the United States could lead other nations to support Guaidó in an effort to remove Maduro; formerDirector of the Central Intelligence Agency and Secretary of StateMike Pompeo approved of the idea.[84] Though the National Assembly sought to assume executive power from Maduro itself, López and Guaidó continued to work with the State Department without the knowledge of other opposition groups since they believed their objectives would be blocked.[84] State Department official Keith Mines wrote on January 20 that Guaidó declaring himself president "could have the impact of causing the regime to crumble in the face of widespread and overwhelming public support" and on January 22, Vice PresidentMike Pence called Guaidó personally and told him that the United States would support his declaration.[84] Neuman wrote that "it's likely that more people in Washington than in Venezuela knew what was going to happen."[84] Guaidó declared himself the acting president of the country, disputing Maduro's presidency and sparking apresidential crisis. Minutes after the declaration, the United States announced that it recognized Guaidó as president of Venezuela while presidentsIván Duque of Colombia andJair Bolsonaro of Brazil, beside Canadian Foreign Affairs MinisterChrystia Freeland, made an abrupt announcement at theWorld Economic Forum that they too recognized Guaidó.[84][85]
Becker said that the United States attempted to remove the Maduro government threatening military action and inflicting desperation on ordinary Venezuelans, planning that distraught citizens or members of the military would remove Maduro in a coup.[67] The United States then increasedsanctions on Venezuela[71] and economic conditions drastically deteriorated due to the sanctions.[86]NPR, following a February 2019 statement by President Trump suggesting that members of the Venezuelan armed forces join Guaidó, described such comments as "the latest push for regime change in Venezuela."[87] U.S.Vice PresidentMike Pence stated in April 2019 that the U.S. was set on Maduro's removal, whether through diplomatic or other means, and that "all options" were on the table.[88]Financial Times wrote following the failed2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt on April 30, 2019, that regime change in Venezuela was one of Trump's main foreign policy goals and that it was not going as planned.[89]The New York Times wrote following April's failed attempt to remove Maduro that President Trump's aides promoted regime change through social media, with Bolton tweeting hundreds of times about the effort to remove Maduro and going on news networks daily to discuss the situation.[90] Secretary of State Pompeo said that the U.S. would take military action "if required" at the time.[91] In August 2019, PresidentDonald Trump's administration imposed additional sanctions on Venezuela as part of their efforts to remove Maduro from office, ordering a freeze on all Venezuelan government assets in theUnited States and barring transactions with U.S. citizens and companies.[92][93] In March 2020, the Trump administration deployed naval units in the Caribbean to pressure the Maduro government and later offered a $15 million reward for the capture of Maduro.[71]
TheCongressional Research Service wrote in 2021 that "U.S. efforts to date have failed to dislodge Maduro and enable the convening of free and fair elections" and said that the Biden administration began to review the societal impact of sanctions against Venezuela.[77] Guaidó never controlled any of Venezuela's institutions and was removed from the interim president position by the National Assembly in December 2022.[94][95]Joe Biden described President Trump's efforts of regime change an "abject failure" and said that it strengthened the position of Maduro.[96]
On January 3, 2026, the United Statesconducted airstrikes on multiple locations across Venezuela, including the capital city ofCaracas, and deposed Venezuelan President Maduro. President Donald Trump announced that Maduro had been captured alongside his wifeCilia Flores and flown out of the country.[97] Attorney GeneralPam Bondi said they would both face charges ofnarcoterrorism in the United States.[98] Trump also announced that the U.S. will be "very strongly involved" in Venezuela's oil industry.[99]
This article incorporates text from afree content work. Licensed under public domain (license statement/permission). Text taken fromU.S. Intervention in Nicaragua, 1911/1912, U.S. Department of State, Office of Electronic Information, Bureau of Public Affairs.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)At the same time, the United States and Mexican governments competed for political influence in Central America. As a result, the U.S. Government intervened more directly in Nicaraguan affairs in two separate but related incidents in 1911 and 1912, with the objective of ensuring the rule of a government friendly to U.S. political and commercial interests and preserving political stability in Central America. Although officials within the administration of President William H. Taft saw themselves as intervening to ensure good government, many Nicaraguans became increasingly alarmed at what seemed to be a foreign takeover of their political, banking, and railroad systems.
What unites these seemingly disparate threads is a contradiction at the core of Trump administration's Venezuela policy: the imposition of crippling economic sanctions aimed at the implosion of the Nicolás Maduro regime, while doing far too little to assist the region in absorbing the millions of refugees resulting from the country's economic collapse. The Trump administration's hostility to immigration and to foreign aid spending overall clashes openly with the effort to procure regime change via the economic strangulation of the Maduro government.
In the last several decades, financial and economic sanctions have become a key tool of U.S. foreign policy. The Trump administration has made particularly heavy use of this tool, especially in its efforts to induce regime change in Venezuela and Iran.
The White House is openly plotting to bring down the government of Nicolas Maduro in Caracas. ... Elliott Abrams ... has been named the point man in the effort to bring regime change to Venezuela.
Trump has recognized a parallel government open to an extra-legal change of government and openly called for coercive regime change through a military coup d'état. ... Under Trump, however, the U.S. has explicitly greenlit military efforts to overthrow the socialists and shown support for other undemocratic measures. He has also clearly found willingness among contemporary opposition leaders, such as Juan Guaidó and Leopoldo López, to embrace such interventionist policies.
In a campaign designed to oust Maduro from power, the United States has encouraged foreign governments and intergovernmental organizations to recognize Guaidó and has imposed a series of targeted economic sanctions to weaken Maduro's regime. ... the Trump administration has consistently exempted humanitarian assistance and insisted that the sanctions 'do not target the innocent people of Venezuela. Despite this assertion, Venezuela's economic situation has worsened severely under the prolonged sanctions, and the humanitarian crisis remains devastating.
Media related toUnited States involvement in regime change in Latin America at Wikimedia Commons