-Caveat Lector-

From
http://opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=85000578

}}>Begin
PRINT WINDOW    CLOSE WINDOW
THE BUSH AGENDA

Harding's Lesson
Leaving the Balkans now could prove costly.
BY MAX BOOT
Monday, February 12, 2001 12:01 a.m.
During the presidential campaign, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice caused
a furor by suggesting that a Bush administration would be interested in rethinking
the U.S. commitment to Balkan peacekeeping: "We don't need to have the 82nd Airborne
escorting kids to kindergarten." Now the whole issue is said to be "under review."
As part of that process, Team Bush should look at a historical parallel that
suggests getting out may not be easy or desirable.
This isn't the first time a Republican president has come into office having
criticized interventions undertaken by his two-term Democratic predecessor. So did
Warren G. Harding in 1920. Woodrow Wilson had been even more interventionist than
Bill Clinton, and for much the same reason. Both presidents believed that expanding
democracy around the world was in America's interest. Wilson wound up not only
getting America into World War I but also occupying Veracruz, Mexico (1914), Haiti
(1915), the Dominican Republic (1916) and part of Cuba (1917); sending Gen. John J.
Pershing deep into Mexico with 10,000 soldiers in pursuit of Pancho Villa (1916);
and dispatching 15,000 soldiers to North Russia and Siberia in 1918 to safeguard
Allied war supplies and cooperate with anti-Bolshevik forces.
Although Wilson, like Mr. Clinton, succeeded GOP presidents who believed in a
muscular foreign policy, by the end of his term he too found himself assailed by
Republicans who claimed that U.S. troops were doing too much. During the 1920
campaign, in particular, Harding denounced "the rape of Haiti." This helped him
appeal for the votes of blacks, then a Republican constituency, and it gave him a
cudgel with which to beat the Democratic vice presidential nominee, Franklin Delano
Roosevelt, who as an assistant secretary of the Navy had played a prominent role in
setting occupation policy. Harding vowed he would not "empower an assistant
secretary of the Nav
y to draft a constitution for helpless neighbors in the West Indies and jam it down 
their throats at the point of bayonets."

Once in office, however, Harding found pulling out a lot tougher than it seemed. His 
powerful secretary of state, Charles Evans Hughes, launched protracted and laborious 
negotiations with Dominican politicians over the te
rms of withdrawal. The last Marines did not leave Dominican soil until 1924, and then 
only after the U.S. had won agreement on a treaty that gave Washington a fair amount 
of say in the republic's financial affairs.
As for Haiti, Harding deferred to Congress. A special Senate committee chaired by Sen. 
Medill McCormick of Illinois spent 11 months studying conditions in Hispaniola, taking 
testimony from both critics and supporters of t
he occupation. The committee criticized some abuses committed by the Marines but did 
not find evidence of widespread atrocities. The senators concluded that a U.S. 
pull-out would lead to a return to the kind of anarchy th
at had led U.S. troops to land in 1915. "We are there, and in my judgment we ought to 
stay there for 20 years," Sen. McCormick said. Harding followed this advice, even if 
it was at odds with his campaign rhetoric.
The U.S. Marines remained until 1934 when, ironically enough, former Assistant Navy 
Secretary Roosevelt pulled them out. It did not take Haiti long to return to a state 
of despotism interspersed with periods of chaos. By
contrast, the 1920s had been one of the most peaceful and prosperous decades in the 
country's troubled history--as the 1990s might have been, had Mr. Clinton not ended 
the second U.S. occupation so soon.

While the GOP administrations of the 1920s stayed in Haiti, they did briefly abandon 
another military commitment, in Nicaragua. U.S. Marines had first been sent there by 
President Taft in 1909-12 to help depose a dictator
 who had destabilized Central America. Thereafter, a legation guard of 100 Marines 
remained in Managua--an implicit threat that an unconstitutional usurpation of power 
would be met with American military force. This helpe
d ensure 13 years of relative stability. But in 1925 Calvin Coolidge, Harding's vice 
president and successor, decided to withdraw the legation guard.
Within a month, Conservative strongman Emiliano Chamorro overthrew the Managua 
government. The opposing political party, the Liberals, raised the banner of revolt. 
By 1926 U.S. Marines were back in Nicaragua to protect Am
erican lives and property from the ensuing civil war. The U.S. then supervised a fair 
election that resulted in a victory for the Liberal candidate. But a rival Liberal 
leader, Augusto Sandino, wanted power for himself an
d launched a guerrilla campaign to seize it. The U.S. Marines would spend six 
frustrating years chasing the Sandinistas around the jungles of Nicaragua.
All this might have been avoided had Coolidge not pulled out the legation guard. 
"Seldom if ever," wrote New York Times correspondent Harold Denny in 1929, with 
unnecessary exaggeration, "has a nation, having full knowled
ge of the danger, taken deliberately a step whose disastrous results were more 
thoroughly a mathematical certainty than the United States took in ordering this 
withdrawal."
This history is worth weighing as President Bush considers Candidate Bush's views on 
the Balkans. The benefits of withdrawing 11,000 U.S. peacekeepers from Bosnia and 
Kosovo would be miniscule--the Pentagon might save per
haps 1% of its budget--while the potential risks are high. Should ethnic cleansing 
again break out, or should NATO splinter, critics would be quick to lay the blame at 
the administration's doorstep. The larger risk is tha
t a quick exit would signal, rightly or wrongly, a general disengagement from world 
affairs. The U.S. last tried that in the 1920s-'30s--an inauspicious precedent if ever 
there was one.
Mr. Boot, the Journal's editorial features editor, is writing a history of America's
small wars.
Copyright © 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

PRINT WINDOW    CLOSE WINDOW



End<{{
A<>E<>R
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The libertarian therefore considers one of his prime educational
tasks is to spread the demystification and desanctification of the
State among its hapless subjects.  His task is to demonstrate
repeatedly and in depth that not only the emperor but even the
"democratic" State has no clothes; that all governments subsist
by exploitive rule over the public; and that such rule is the reverse
of objective necessity.  He strives to show that the existence of
taxation and the State necessarily sets up a class division between
the exploiting rulers and the exploited ruled.  He seeks to show that
the task of the court intellectuals who have always supported the State
has ever been to weave mystification in order to induce the public to
accept State rule and that these intellectuals obtain, in return, a
share in the power and pelf extracted by the rulers from their deluded
subjects.
[[For a New Liberty:  The Libertarian Manifesto, Murray N. Rothbard,
Fox & Wilkes, 1973, 1978, p. 25]]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to