[A-List] US imperialism: more of the same

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

A bringer of liberty can soon become an occupier
By Eric Rauchway
Financial Times: March 19 2003

George W. Bush says American armies come to the Middle East as liberators,
not conquerors; he swears the US has "no intention of determining the
precise form of Iraq's new government" after a war. The Iraqi opposition
welcomed his words, but they should take care. Washington's line echoes the
failed ambitions of past US leaders to invent a benevolent imperialism. Mr
Bush's reputed role model, William McKinley, sought to distinguish the US
from the colonising nations of Europe by bringing democracy to the
Philippines. Instead he brought terror and mayhem to US soldiers and
Filipinos alike.

Hawks in the McKinley administration believed the world would benefit from
greater US naval power and overseas influence. In 1898 the USS Maine blew up
while at anchor off the Spanish colony of Cuba. Subsequent investigations
found no link between the explosion and the government of Spain, but the
incident sparked a war that the hawks wanted. The US paused briefly in its
march to vengeance to disavow all "disposition or intention" of occupying
Spain's possessions, claiming to fight only for their freedom.

After a swift victory the US held Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippine
islands, whose proximity to mainland Asia excited US strategists. Military
seers imagined a US version of Hong Kong in the archipelago. Filipinos would
happily host US military and commercial traffic while serving as an example
of democracy to the region.

Beset by this vision, McKinley overcame his original intention by inviting
divine intervention. "I am not ashamed to tell you," he declared, "that I
went down on my knees and prayed almighty God for light and guidance." And
the Lord heeded his servant William, telling the president "there was
nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the
Filipinos, and uplift and civilise and Christianise them, and by God's grace
do the very best we could by them as our fellow men for whom Christ also
died". So the US troops remained.

In the wake of Europe's unseemly scramble for colonies in Africa, the US
occupation of the Philippine islands seemed to its critics like more of the
same. But to its practitioners, American imperialism felt new and exciting.
The US had after all thrown off the yoke of oppression. It could teach
others to do the same.

US armies had come to prove, McKinley declared, that Asians too might enjoy
"that full measure of individual rights and liberties which is the heritage
of free peoples". The US landed not only marines but schoolteachers on
Philippine shores, bringing textbooks and munitions alike. And indeed,
literacy rates rose. Mortality rates from malaria and cholera fell. New
roads and schools sprang up. So did some civic institutions, run by
Filipinos who welcomed the chance to govern.

But trouble plagued the new colony from the start. As Senator Henry Cabot
Lodge mildly noted: "Those people whom we liberated down there have turned
against us." An army of 75,000 Filipinos began to fight a guerrilla war
against their benevolent occupiers. The Americans had the advantage of
superior firepower; the rebels enjoyed the privilege of camouflage that
accrues to an occupied people. The well-armed Americans hunkered in groups
while stealthy guerrillas sowed terror among the coloniser troops - who then
retaliated against the populace at large. This pattern culminated in an
ambush on the American garrison at Balangiga - the worst massacre of US
troops since Custer. In reply, US forces laid waste to the surrounding
country.

News of such terrorism and indiscriminate response brought the war to a
sputtering halt - although US troops stayed in the islands and rebels
remained in the wilderness, as they do today. The Philippines did not attain
independence, let alone democracy, until 1946.

Mr Bush now cites the democratic postwar reconstruction of Japan and Germany
as precedents. But in 1945 the US ranked first among equals as peacemakers,
leading a co-operative international project to rebuild shattered opponents.
For the old Axis powers, Americans wrote new constitutions reflecting
international aspirations, including measures more progressive than US
customs. The present effort to keep other nations at arm's length, promising
to bring to Iraq a uniquely US experience of war and its aftermath, means
there is something old in store for the new axis of enemies.

The writer is associate professor of history at the University of
California, Davis