After Admiral George Dewey's ships had waited for months, US ground troops arrived in the Philippines. The US troops allied with the Filipino guerillas to fight against the Spanish in the Spanish-American war. The guerillas were led by Emilio Aguinaldo, a Filipino nationalist who the Spanish had exiled, and who Dewey brought back to help unify the people against their Spanish overlords. The Filipinos saw the US as their ticket to freedom, so they willingly fought with them. On August 13, 1898, US troops, aided by Aguinaldo's guerillas, captured Manila.
War in the Philippines proved to many Americans the importance of another set of Pacific islands, the Hawaiian Islands. Hawaii, considered the "crossroads of the Pacific" might be used as a coaling station to help supply the US Navy in future operations in the Pacific. To be honest, Hawaii could have easily worked as a coaling station without formal annexation, since American businessmen essentially controlled the island anyway. Nonetheless, keeping with the spirit of the times, the US annexed Hawaii on July 7, 1898. Hawaiians were given full US citizenship. Because the US had such a massive business interest in Hawaii, and so many American businessmen lived there, this came as little surprise.
The US switch to imperialist behavior that occurred in 1898 has been a topic of great historical attention. After all, the US has generally claimed to stand in opposition to the practice of taking colonies, to be an advocate of freedom, democracy, and self-government for all. Some historians believe that this imperialist period was a "Great Aberration", a mistake that the US would never repeat, and one that goes against everything the US stands for. Others think that America really continued to have a kind of "informal colonial" influence throughout the twentieth century. By "informal colonialism", they mean that the US has promoted democracy as a means to opening foreign markets for American manufactures and sources of raw materials. In this way, through a subtle dominance based on economics rather than direct politics, the US was able to create the same economic relationship that European powers had with their colonies. Under this view, the colony grabbing of 1898 (Guam, Hawaii, Philippines, Puerto Rico) was only the most obvious episode of American imperialism; it was the short period before the US discovered more subtle methods of economic domination, known as "neo-imperialism".
The conquests of 1898 did not entirely mimic the European colonial model. In some senses, American actions in1898 represented a "New Imperialism", a new and unique empire, separate from the European colonial tradition and distinctly American. American imperialism was not a rejection of the anti-colonialism of the early republic, but a conscious choice based on economic motivations that held true before and after 1898. Americans were not merely aping the trappings of the European colonial experience. Instead of seeking empire for God, glory or gold, some would argue that American imperialism sought markets for industrial overproduction. Furthermore, access to foreign markets rather than actual political control of markets was the goal. In earlier mercantilist philosophies, nations sought colonies as outlets for their finished goods and as sources of raw materials for their extractive economies. American imperialists, though, wanted colonies that would serve to keep foreign markets accessible and open, not colonies that would be the markets themselves. The Philippines were important not only for a population of 7 million, but because the island provided room for a naval base from which the US could protect its business interests in Japan and China.
1 New sources for raw materials
2 New markets for finished goods
3 Nationalism – expansion of European culture
4 Missionary activity – expansion of Christianity
5 Strategic military and naval bases
6 A place for excess population to migrate
7 Social and economic opportunities
8 Humanitarian reasons
9 The "White Man's Burden" (today regarded as thinly veiled racism)
Let's explore them in more detail.
1 – sources for raw materials. Initially, Spain, France, England and Portugal set up mercantile colonies in the "New World" for this reason. It was a source of new raw materials and natural resources, and by implementing a labor system (African or native american slavery, the encomienda tribute system, mita labor lottery, etc.). Thanks to explorers like David Livingstone traveling through the heart of Africa and reporting on his findings, Europeans turned their attention to Africa. Some of the most attractive natural resources in Africa were diamonds, gold, and rubber (concentrated mostly in the DRC, or as it was known during the imperial period, Congo).
2 – New markets for finished goods. Long the industrial powerhouse of the world, Europeans would import raw materials and natural resources from Africa, process and manufacture them, and resell the finished goods back to settlements in Africa.
3- Nationalism. As European countries fought for more land (because land=money), they scrambled for new colonies in Africa. Part of this was because of the desire to share in global profits, but another reason was nationalistic- pride for your country and the desire for it to be a global leader.
4- Missionary Activity. Northern Africa had been Islamic since the Umayyads, African Kings and nomadic Berber peoples of Northern Africa adopted/spread the religion beginning in the 8th and 9th centuries. Europeans had always hoped to find Christian kingdoms in Africa, which is what prompted some Portuguese explorers in the 15th century to make so many stops in Africa on their way to the spice islands. New colonies in Africa would not only make Europeans richer, but also help spread Christianity.
5- Strategic naval and military bases are key to some countries. England, for instance, took control of the Cape of Good Hope (the southern tip of Africa), and after fighting the Ottomans, the Suez Canal. Both of these were key to controlling trade between Europe and the Indian Ocean. By controlling the southern tip, the British navy could control ships traveling around Africa, and by controlling the Suez Canal, the British could control ships hoping to cut directly from the Mediterranean Sea into the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. For the British, controlling trade was about dominating the global economy.
6- Excess population migration. While not one of the main motivations for colonization, this does account for some immigration into Africa settlements, which ties in to the next motivation:
7- Social and Economic opportunities. Much like the original settlers who came to the new British colonies in North America, some settlements popped up in Africa to make new economic opportunities out of the wealth and fortunes in natural resources and raw materials.
8&9- Humanitarian reasons and the White Man's Burden – the phrase White Man's Burden comes from Rudyard Kipling's poem of the same name (see reference below) and essentially gave these two motivations for colonization. Some Europeans felt that the African states and cultures were not as civilized as the Western world because they did not possess the technology that their northern counterparts had. [Side note: author Jared Diamond would argue that this phenomenon had NOTHING to do with any ethnic group being inferior, but instead because of the natural resources available in Africa compared to those available in Europe. In order to "civilize" the Africans, some Europeans felt it was their duty, the "White Man's Burden", to colonize and westernize the Africans.
—
As far as reasons against imperialism in Africa, David Livingstone, the famous England explorer who inadvertently inspired European nations to colonize in Africa, was vehemently against the idea of colonization. He valued African culture and its landmarks, and when approached by American journalist Henry Stanley to help set up imperial colonies, Livingstone refused to help. Stanley later went to King Leopold II of Belgium, who agreed with Stanley, and Leopold set up the most brutal colony of all in modern-day Democratic Republic of Congo.
Generally, there were little European arguments against imperialism in Africa.
The term “Gunboat diplomacy†(referencing the type of arms-equipped boats used to protect national borders in conflict) describes a country that uses warfare as a threat against other nations in order to achieve its own goals. This was a defining characteristic of the Cold War; as opposed to a “hot†war, the Cold War saw no battles fought, but the threat of war was palpable for decades. Neither the United States nor the Soviet Union fired a single shot, but both possessed powerful nuclear weapons, ensuring mutual destruction if either side engaged in military action against the other. Tension between the nations and their allies was a major factor in international relations during the latter half of the 20th Century, and though the US and the Soviet Union never entered into battle, they each engaged in several wars to defend their political and social beliefs.
Spreading democracy has often been cited as one of the USA’s primary goals in foreign relations. However, American troops have often been more successful in limiting the reach of Communism, rather than establishing successful American-style democracies. Often, the US would rather support an authoritarian dictator—which directly contradicts democratic values—than allow a Communist or Socialist government to be established.
The Roosevelt Corollary was an addition to the Monroe Doctrine articulated by President Theodore Roosevelt in his State of the Union address in 1904 after the Venezuela Crisis of 1902–03. The corollary states that the United States will intervene in conflicts between European countries and Latin American countries to enforce legitimate claims of the European powers, rather than having the Europeans press their claims directly.
Roosevelt tied his policy to the Monroe Doctrine, and it was also consistent with his foreign policy included in his Big Stick Diplomacy. Roosevelt stated that in keeping with the Monroe Doctrine, the United States was justified in exercising "international police power" to put an end to chronic unrest or wrongdoing in the Western Hemisphere. While the Monroe Doctrine had sought to prevent European intervention, the Roosevelt Corollary was used to justify US intervention throughout the hemisphere. In 1934, President Franklin D. Roosevelt renounced interventionism and established his Good Neighbor policy for the Western Hemisphere.