Showing posts with label El Salvador. Show all posts
Showing posts with label El Salvador. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 2, 2024

Palm Sunday, April 2, 1944. Soviets enter Romania, Rebellion in El Salvador.

Sgt. Walter Holden, Haleyville, Ala., Pfc. Raymond Holler, Route 1, Lenoir, N.C., and Pvt. John Mart, Route 2, Sanford, N.C. of the 3d Infantry Division in an obviously staged photograph at Anzio.  All three men are wearing the new M1943 uniform, which the photo was probably intended to illustrate.  The uniform featured the M1943 field jacket, the M1943 field trousers, and the M1943 combat boot.  It remained the essential Army pattern of uniform for decades, and indeed to the present day, with modifications.  Replacing earlier uniform variants would, however, take months.

Today in World War II History—April 2, 1944: Soviet troops enter Romania. First US B-29 Superfortress bomber arrives at Kharagpur, India, near Calcutta. Armed revolt erupts in El Salvador.

From Sarah Sundin's blog.

The entering of Romania was more proof, if anymore was needed, that the Third Reich was in its final act.  Romania had sought to exit the war, but had been dissuaded from doing so by the Germans.  It would start pondering that once again in earnest. 

Romania, although somewhat forgotten in the West, was not a minor power in some significant ways.  The country had the third-largest army in the Axis in Europe, behind Italy and Japan, until Italy's 1943 surrender, at which time it was the second-largest Axis power.  Its army was in fact the fourth largest in the world.  It was plagued with internal problems, however, with a rank and file that was woefully uneducated and an officer corps that was condescending towards its men.  Generally, Romanians fought better under German officers and NCO's.

It was a monarchy, but a monarchy which was, at the time, led by a military dictator.

Hitler issued his directive 54 with the topic of stopping the Russian advance, which obviously wasn't going to happen.


The rebellion in El Salvador was a pro-democracy one against the country's fascist military dictator Maximiliano Hernández Martínez and included significant military elements.  Martinez admired Mussolini and Hitler, and like Hitler he was a vegetarian.  El Salvador declared war on the Axis in December 1941, but it took no actual part in the fighting and refused US requests to station troops there.

The rebellion would be violently put down, but it would nonetheless lead to Martinez' fall a month later.

Martinez was killed in a labor dispute with his taxi driver in 1966 while living in exile in Honduras.

The Japanese 15th Army (Mutaguchi) continued to advance.

The Italian Communist Party declared its support for the Badoglio government.

The 1944 Tour of Flanders bicycle race commenced.

Last prior edition:

Saturday, April 1, 1944. The closing curtain for the Axis.

Tuesday, February 7, 2023

Wednesday, February 7, 1923. The General Treaty of Peace and Amity

The General Treaty of Peace and Amity was signed in Washington D.C. between Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. 

It provided:

Article I

The governments of the high contracting parties shall not recognize any other governments which may come into power in any of the five Republics as a consequence of a coup d'état, or of a revolution against the recognized government, so long as the freely elected representatives of the people thereof, have not constitutionally reorganized the country.[4]

Article II

Desiring to make secure in the Republics of Central America the benefits which are derived from the maintenance of free institutions and to contribute at the same time toward strengthening their stability and the prestige with which they should be surrounded, they declare that every act, disposition or measure which alters the constitutional organization in any of them is to be deemed a menace to the peace of said Republics, whether it proceeded from any public power of from the private citizens.

Consequently, the governments of the contracting parties will not recognize any other governments which may come into power in any of the five Republics through a coup d'état or a revolution against a recognized government, so long as the freely elected representatives of the people thereof, have not constitutionally reorganized the country. And even in such a case they obligate themselves not to acknowledge the recognition of any of the persons elected as President, Vice President or Chief of State designate should fall under any of the following heads:

(1) If he should be the leader or one of the leaders of a coup d'état or revolution, or through blood relationship or marriage, be an ascendent or descendant or brother of such leader or leaders.

(2) If he should have been a Secretary of State or should have held some high military command during the accomplishment of the coup d'état, the revolution, or while the election was being carried on, or if he should have held this office or command within the six months proceeding the coup d'état, revolution, or the election.

Furthermore, in no case shall recognition be accorded to a government which arises from election to power of a citizen expressly and unquestionably disqualified by the Constitution of his country as eligible to election as President, Vice President or State designate.

Honduras and El Salvador did not ratify it, and Costa Rica violated it in 1931 after it recognized the overthrow of the El Salvadoran government.  In 1934 the Central American Court of Justice held it to be illegal.

Friday, December 30, 2022

Wars and Rumors of War, 2022. The Russo Ukrainian War Edition, Part Nine. Rout

Ukrainian Christmas stamp.

November 11, 2022.

As amazing as it is to think it, it's actually the case.  Russia is being routed in Ukraine.

But maybe it's not really that amazing, except for one thing.  We'll get to that.

The last war I can think of, offhand, in which Russian forces performed really well was during the 1812+ stage of the Napoleonic Wars, keeping in mind that I'm very ignorant on the Crimean War.

That's 210 years ago.

The Imperial Russian Army preformed badly during the Russo Japanese War.  It had mixed performance during World War One, but in the end, the Germans defeated Russia.

Sure, the Red Army won in the Russian Civil War, but any army performs well in a civil war, if its truly fought out, as the other army is also made up of people with the same training or lack thereof.

It lost to the Pole is the Russo Polish War that followed the Civil War.

And tiny Finland fought it to a standstill in the Winter War.

Then there's World War Two.

Now, let's given credit where credit is due. The Russian Army killed more Germans than any other army in the field. . . and the Germans killed a lot of Russians too.

Indeed, with a massive numerical advantage it didn't really manage to get its act together until Fall, 1942, for the most part, although there are real and notable exceptions.

One of the things that those real and notable exceptions tell us, like it or not, is that Stalin did a pretty good job of reforming an army he'd destroyed in the 30s and giving it 11th hour backbone.

After the Fall of 1942, while it hemorrhaged deserters like sand in the hand, it preformed well, even though it preformed well as an armed mob.

But since then? What has it done well, really?

Hmmm. . . 

Afghanistan? 

Well, it lost.

Syria?

The Newark New Jersey police department could probably turn in a real performance there and look impressive.

Under trained troops, bad equipment, no doctrinal flexibility.  These are Russian things.

And the Ukrainian Army, having been reformed since 2014, is a Western Army.  It's more like the Army of Poland or even West Germany than Russia, now.

Ukraine has taken back its territory west of the Dnipr.

By Viewsridge - Own work, derivate of Russo-Ukraine Conflict (2014-2021).svg by Rr016Missile attacks source:BNO NewsTerritorial control sources:Template:Russo-Ukrainian War detailed map / Template:Russo-Ukrainian War detailed relief mapISW, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=115506141

Slava Ukraine.

November 15, 2022

U.S. intelligence indicates that Putin may have delayed the Russian withdrawal from Kherson in order to attempt to preclude it from being viewed as a Biden victory.

If so, it's an interesting example of how Russia regards American domestic politics.

Today, Russia mounted a massive rocket attack on Ukraine, sending two missiles into Poland, where they killed two.

November 16, 2022

President Zelenskyy addressed the G20 and gave a 10 point peace plan which included a Russian withdrawal from all Ukrainian territory.  It can safely be assumed that Russia will reject this.

The missile that went down in Poland now appears to have been an errant Ukrainian one.

November 18, 2022

Russo Ukrainian War

Col. Vadim Boyko, a Russian army officer who was head of a military academy and involved in Putin's conscription attempt, has reportedly committed suicide, although reports also hold he was found with five shots in his chest.

Russia pounded Ukraine with missiles again yesterday.

North Korea

The BBC reports:

North Korea has launched an intercontinental ballistic missile with enough range to hit the US mainland, Japan's defence minister says.

The West in general and the US in particular has dinked around with North Korea so long while it worked on this project that the result is that the American population is now vulnerable to an ICBM strike by North Korea. There's no doubt that North Korea will attempt to leverage this against the US.

No US President has been effective in dealing with the Communist Stalinist Theme Park under its current leadership.  As a result, a real question has now developed on what the US can and should do to protect its interests before North Korea is fully nuclear capable.

November 20, 2022

North Korea.

North Korea's dictator/monarch was photographed showing his ICBM's to his 14-year-old daughter this week, thereby actually confirming her existence.

The United States and South Korea have been conducting practice aerial missions.  I'd frankly regard a U.S. airstrike at this point on North Korea's nuclear capacity as not unlikely, although less than 50%.

November 23, 2022

North Korea.

Kim Yo Jong stated that the United States would face “a more fatal security crisis” if it presses forward with its plan to seek condemnation of North Korea's missile behavior in the UN Security Council.

This is a clear threat of violence of some sort.

Russo Ukrainian War

Ukrainian security forces raid the Pechersk Lavra Orthodox Christian monastery in Kyiv on the basis that it feared the monastery might be used for sabotage.

This points out the complicated nature of the relationship between the three branches of Apostolic Christianity in Ukraine. Before the war commenced, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which had been a branch of the Russian Orthodox Church, sought and received autocephalous status from the Greek Metropolitan of Constantinople.  This was condemned by the Russian Orthodox Church, which is the largest branch of Eastern Orthodoxy, and a schism developed.  Some of the Ukrainian Orthodox did not go along with the separation and remained subject to the Metropolitan of Moscow.

The other branch is the Eastern Rite Ukrainian Catholic Church, which is in communion with Rome.

The invasion of Ukraine was justified by Putin in part as being in defense of Orthodoxy. Russia under Putin has been highly resistant to social trends in the West and in part this is scene as an aspect of this topic.

November 24, 2022

Russo Ukrainian War.

Russia has been concentrating on destroying infrastructure targets, energy generation in particular, the last several days.  The attacks have been massive in extent and appear to be motivated by the same mistaken reasoning that was behind the Blitz by the Luftwaffe and the Allied strategic bombing campaign of World War Two, that such efforts destroy civilian will to fight.

Iranian Insurrection

Protests have spread to the point where Iran is now regarded to be in a state of pre insurrection and the government is having to deploy armed forces in an attempt to address it.

December 4, 2022

El Salvador/Central American Criminal Crisis

The government of El Salvador deployed a huge number of troops and paramilitary police to enter a gang controlled area near the capitol yesterday.

Russo Ukrainian War

The Ukrainian Army has crossed the Dnipro.

December 5, 2022

Two Russian air force bombers were destroyed by an explosion on the runway at Engels Air Force Base, which is deep inside of Russia.  Explosions also happened at a Russian Air Force base at Saratov.

Speculation is widespread that these are a deep Ukrainian drone strike.  Both locations are near each other, and they have been used for strikes on Ukraine.  They are near Saratov on the Volga.

December 6, 2022

Russia continues to engage in massive missile strikes on Ukraine, but for the second day in a row Ukraine has hit back with a drone strike on an airfield, this time upon Kursk.\

These strikes contrast with each other in that the Russian strikes are against civil targets, while the Ukrainian ones are on Russian air assets.  Russian behavior is making it easier for Ukraine to hit targets inside of Russia without Western protests, and the Russians seem to be baffled as to how this occurs.  News about the strikes has come from Russian media, with the Russians seemingly being stunned that it's occurring.

What is not clear is the extent to which Ukraine can continue this, and whether these raids are essentially experimental.  If Ukraine can manufacture these long range drones in sufficient numbers, Russian air assets will have to be pulled back to more distant bases and logistical stockpiles in Russia will become endangered.

December 22, 2022

100,400 Russian soldiers have died in the war.

That figure is roughly twice the number of Americans who died in the very long Vietnam War, the last major war fought by the United States (yes, there have been wars since then, but not on that scale).  Added to that, in 1973 when that war ended for the US, it's population exceeded that of Russia's now.

15,000 Russians died in Afghanistan.

President Zelensky spoke personally to Congress this week.

December 26, 2022

Putin suggested he's ready for talks, while blaming the lack of talks on everyone else.

He's also hinted that the property of Russian oligarchs who are not supporting the war may be confiscated.

Russian assaults, which are not achieving much, remain unabated

FWIW, Christmas, on the Orthodox calendar, is January 7, 2023, on its liturgical calendar.  While I wouldn't put too much stock in it, if there'd be a calendar based timing for some sort of dramatic peace related event coming from the Russians, and I'm not saying that there is, that'd be a good date for it.

December 27, 2022

President Zelenskyy has indicated that he's relying on India to advance a peace proposal to Russia.

In spite of news of peace talks being a possibility appearing in the Western press, it's highly doubtful that any peace negotiations will start any time soon.

December 27, cont.

Russia today issued an ultimatum to Ukraine to accept Russian terms or the Russian army will settle the issue, according to Russia.

This would seem to suggest that Russia is on the verge of launching a new offensive and presumably it has some confidence that this one will be successful, something of which there is no guaranty.

December 29, 2022

Alexei Maslov, a senior Russian Army armor officer who had fallen under criticism, has been reported dead within a day of a meeting with Putin being cancelled.

Pavel Antov, age 69, a Russian sausage tycoon, fell to his death at an Indian hotel.  His friend, Vladimir Budanov, died at the same hotel four days prior.

An unusual number of oligarchs and Russian figures of note have died since the war started. Antov adds to the list, since the war commenced, that includes the following:

Leonid Shulma, age 60, by suicide. Igor Nosov, age 43, stroke.  Alexander Tyulakov age 61, suicide. Mikhail Watford age 66.  Vasily Melnikov age 43 Wife and two sons found dead beside him. Vladislav Avayevage 51. Wife and 13-year-old daughter found dead beside him Sergey Protosenya age 55, Hanged from a handrail, wife and daughter found dead in their beds with blunt axe wounds and stab wounds. Andrei Krukovsky age 33.  Fell from cliff. Alexander Subbotin age 31.  Drug induced heart attack. Yuri Voronov age 61. Gunshot wounds to the head, pistol found next to his body.  Dan Rapoport age 52.  Fall. Ravil Maganov age 67. Fell out of a hospital window.  Ivan Pechorin age 39. Fell off boat and drowned. Vladimir Sungorkin age 68. Stroke. Anatoly Gerashchenko age 72.  Fall. Pavel Pchelnikov age 52. Suicide. Vyacheslav Taran age 53 Helicopter crash. Grigory Kochenov age 41.  Fall from balcony during police search of apartment. Dmitriy Zelenov age 50.  Injuries sustained in fall.

That's rather odd.

December 30, 2022

United States v. ISIL

The US announced it has killed about 700 ISIL operatives over the past year, with this taking place in Syria and Iraq.

Russo Ukrainian War

Russia continues its massive missle campaign against Ukrainian infrastruture, clearly intending to completely destroy it.

Last prior Edition.

Wars and Rumors of War, 2022. The Russo Ukrainian War Edition, Part Eight. The one in which the Russian forces collapse and Putin puts his finger on the nuclear trigger.


Recent Related Threads:

The Man of the Year.

Whether the battle for Ukraine fills one with hope or with fear, Volodymyr Zelensky galvanized the world in a way we haven’t seen in decades.

Time magazine, on their choice to make Volodymyr Zelensky their Man of the Year.

I had no doubt he would be.

Odd to live in a year in which some in far off lands rose so bravely to the occasion, while others closer to home failed so greatly to live up to obvious standards.

What is wrong with the Putin supporting right?



Sunday, November 13, 2022

Friday, November 13, 1942. The Sullivan's

In North Africa, the British 8th Army captured Tobruk, a major British victory and a major Afrika Korps defeat.

Off of the Solomon's, the Japanese sank the U.S. Navy light cruiser Juneau, which took 687 men with it, including five brothers of the Irish Catholic Sullivan family of Iowa.

The Sullivans.

It's commonly asserted that after this the U.S. military would not allow siblings to serve together, but in fact many siblings were already serving together in combat in North Africa as members of Federalized National Guard units. Entire towns would end up loosing huge numbers of their male citizens in the combat actions to come. There was a policy change, which relieved a sole survivor from military service, but it did not come until 1943, and was partially due to the deaths of the Borgstrom brothers of Utah as well.  Indeed, the Navy already had a policy precluding siblings from serving on the same vessel, but they did not actively enforce it.

A sister of the Sullivan brothers remained in Navy service.  Indeed, their enlistment in the Navy, or in once case a reenlistment, was to avenge the death of her boyfriend, who died at Peal Harbor.

The Sullivan family was not informed of the death of their sons until 1943, at which time their father was informed of all of their deaths at one time.  The Navy would commission a ship in their honor during the war, and oddly enough, one of the sons of the one of the men lost would later serve as a post-war officer aboard it. That ship has been decommissioned, but a second The Sullivans was commissioned to take its place.  

The current The Sullivans.

The tragic story was also made into a patriotic movie during the war itself, which was released in 1944.

The Sullivan story was the inspiration for the film Saving Private Ryan, although it's obviously in a much different setting.

It should be noted that at least over 100 men survived the sinking of the Juneau, and were spotted by an USAAC B-17, but radio silence precluded its rapid reporting.

On the same day the cruiser Atlanta and the destroyers Barton, Cushing, Laffey, Monssen and Preston went down while the Japanese suffered the loss of the cruiser Kinugasa and destroyers Akatsuki and Yūdachi.

Brazil, El Salvador, Honduras and Panama broke off diplomatic relations with Vichy France.

Saturday, July 23, 2022

Thursday, July 23, 1942. Changing Case Blue.



Hitler ordered Case Blue extended.  He was, at that time, pleased with German success at Rostov, which was taken on this day by the Germans, reinforced by a Slovak Division, but frustrated by the overall slow progress of the offensive.  The new directive, number 45, changed the objectives for most of the Axis forces in the offensive.

Lack of Soviet resistance at Rostov had convinced Hitler that Stalingrad would require little effort, so the 6th Army was tasked with taking the city alone.  The 4th Army was redirected south, which required it to travel through the 6th Army, a disastrous move and regarded as one of the great German errors of the war.

Sarah Sundin reports, on her blog:
Today in World War II History—July 23, 1942: On Kokoda Trail on New Guinea, Japanese take Awala and force Australians back toward Wairopi.

She also reports:

In Switzerland, Salvadoran consul-general Col. Jose Arturo Castellanos and Hungarian Jewish businessman George Mandel-Mantello, Castellanos’s secretary, begin forging thousands of false Salvadoran papers to send to Jews in Europe; 90% of certificate holders will survive the Holocaust

The Secretary of War, Cordell Hull, issued a statement on the war and human freedom.

Washington, D.C., July 23, 1942

The conflict now raging throughout the earth is not a war of nation against nation. It is not a local or regional war or even a series of such wars. On the side of our enemies, led and driven by the most ambitious, depraved, and cruel leaders in history, it is an attempt to conquer and enslave this country and every country. On our side, the side of the United Nations, it is, for each of us, a life-and-death struggle for the preservation of our freedom, our homes, our very existence. We are united in our determination to destroy the worldwide forces of ruthless conquest and brutal enslavement. Their defeat will restore freedom or the opportunity for freedom alike to all countries and all people.

I

From Berlin and Tokyo the assault on human freedom has spread in ever-widening circles. In some cases the victim nations were lulled into inaction by promises or by protestations of peaceful intention. In other cases they were so intimidated that no preparation for resistance was made. In all cases the invaders, before armed attack, set into motion every conceivable device of deceit, subversion, treachery, and corruption within the borders of the intended victim.

As country after country, in Europe and in Asia, was attacked in this way, it became clear that no nation anywhere was immune, that for none was safety to be found in mere desire for peace, in avoidance of provocation, in neutrality, or in distance from the centers of assault. Nation after nation learned-too late-that safety against such an attack lay only in more effective force; in superior will; in concerted action of all free nations directed toward resisting and defeating the common enemies; in applying the law of self-defense and self-preservation rather than in relying upon professions of neutrality, which, in the face of a world-wide movement to subjugate all nations and all peoples, are as absurd and as suicidal as are such professions on the part of a citizen of a peaceful community attacked by a band of confessed outlaws.

Today twenty-eight United Nations are fighting against the would-be conquerors and enslavers of the human race. We know what is at stake. By the barbarian invaders of today nothing is spared-neither life, nor morals, nor honor, nor virtue, nor pledges, nor the customs, the national institutions, even the religion of any people. Their aim is to sweep away every vestige of individual and national rights; to substitute, the world over, their unspeakable tyranny for the ways of life developed each for itself by the various nations; to make all mankind subservient to their will; to convert the two billions of the earth's inhabitants into abject victims and tools of their insatiable lust for power and dominion.

We have seen their work in the countries they have invaded-murder of defenseless men, women, and children; rape, torture, and pillage; mass terrorization; the black system of hostages; the starvation and deprivations that beggar description; the most thorough-going bondage the world has ever seen.

This is the so-called "New Order" of Hitler and the Japanese war lords-an order as old as slavery-new only in the calculated thoroughness of its cruelty; in the depth of the degradation to which it subjects its victims; in the degree to which it has revived the worst practices of the darkest ages in history.

From time immemorial attempts at conquest and enslavement have checked and harried the great onward march of men and women toward greater freedom and higher levels of civilized existence. The methods employed have been the same as those which we witness today. Ruthless, ambitious men would succeed in corrupting, coercing, or deceiving into blind obedience enough servile followers to attack or terrify peaceful and law-abiding peoples, too often unprepared to resist. In a few instances whole civilizations collapsed under the impact, and darkness descended on large portions of the world. More often, the attacks were-at great cost-defeated, and mankind resumed its onward march. Yet throughout the ages two lessons have remained unlearned.

The first is that man's innate striving for freedom cannot be extinguished. Since the world began too many men have fought, suffered, and died for freedom-and not in vain-for doubt to remain on that score. And yet, over and over again would-be conquerors and enslavers of mankind have sought to translate their mad dreams of barbarous domination into reality.

The second lesson is that liberty is truly won only when it is guarded by the same watchfulness, the same courage, the same willingness to fight for it which first secured it. Repeatedly throughout history, free men-having won the fight, having acquired precious rights and privileges which freedom brings-have dropped their guard, relaxed their vigilance, taken their freedom for granted. They have busied themselves with many things and have not noticed the beginnings of new tyrannies, the rise of new threats to liberty. They have become so abhorrent of force and cruelty that they have believed the bully and the gangster could be reformed by reason and justice or be defeated by passive resistance. And so they have been surprised and unprepared when the attacks have come again.

It is perhaps too much to expect that tyrants will ever learn that man's longing for liberty cannot be destroyed. Dreams of conquest have their roots in diseased mentality. And that malady may well be ineradicable.

But it is not too much to expect that free men may learn-and never forget-that lack of vigilance is the greatest danger to liberty; that enjoyment of liberty is the fruit of willingness to fight, suffer, and die for it; that the right to freedom cannot be divorced from the duty of defending it.

This latest assault on human freedom is, in a profound sense, a searching test for nations and for individuals. There is no surer way for men and for nations to show themselves unworthy of liberty than, by supine submission and refusal to fight, to render more difficult the task of those who are fighting for the preservation of human freedom-unless it be to align themselves, freely and voluntarily, with the destroyers of liberty. There is no surer way for men and for nations to show themselves worthy of liberty than to fight for its preservation, in any way that is open to them, against those who would destroy it for all.

In the plans of the new tyrants of the East and of the West, there is no freedom or hope for anyone. If there be some people who believe that they can expect from Hitler or the Japanese war lords greater measure of freedom or of opportunity for freedom than they now possess, they need only look at the firing squads in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway, France, Yugoslavia, at the concentration camps in Germany and Austria. They need only see the degradation of the forced laborers torn from every occupied country. They can learn the fraudulent quality of that brand of "freedom" from the Chinese in Nanking, from the Filipinos in Manila, from the inhabitants of the East Indies.

There is no chance for liberty for any people anywhere save through the victory of the free peoples. Never did a plainer duty to fight against its foes devolve upon all peoples who prize liberty and all who aspire to it. Never was there such an opportunity for every people, as have the people of the Philippines, to demonstrate its fitness both for the rights and the responsibilities of freedom-and, through proof given of its fitness, to create an overwhelming sentiment in every country of the world in support of its striving for liberty.

II

We, Americans, are fighting today because we have been attacked. We are fighting, as I have said, to preserve our very existence. We and the other free peoples are forced into a desperate fight because we did not learn the lessons of which I have spoken. We are forced to fight because we ignored the simple but fundamental fact that the price of peace and of the preservation of right and freedom among nations is the acceptance of international responsibilities.

After the last war too many nations, including our own, tolerated, or participated in, attempts to advance their own interests at the expense of any system of collective security and of opportunity for all. Too many of us were blind to the evils which, thus loosed, created growing cancers within and among nations-political suspicions and hatreds; the race of armaments, first stealthy and then the subject of flagrant boasts; economic nationalism and its train of economic depression and misery; and finally the emergence from their dark places of the looters and thugs who found their opportunity in disorder and disaster. The shadow of a new war fell across the world. War began in 1931 when Japan invaded China.

From the time when the first signs of menace to the peace of the world appeared on the horizon, the Government of the United States strove increasingly to promote peace on the solid foundation of law, justice, non-intervention, non-aggression, and international collaboration. With growing insistence we advocated the principles of a broad and constructive world order in political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual relations among nations-principles which must constitute the foundation of any satisfactory future world order. We practiced these principles in our good-neighbor policy, which was applicable to every part of the earth and which we sought to apply not alone in the Western Hemisphere, but in the Pacific area, in Europe, and everywhere else as well.

When hostilities broke out and wars were declared, our Government made every honorable and feasible effort to prevent spread of the conflicts and to safeguard this country against being drawn into war. But danger increased all around us. Peaceful unoffending countries, one after another, were brought under the heel of the invader, both in Europe and in Asia. Hitler and the Japanese war lords, by their acts and their official declarations have made it plain that the purpose of the Japanese is to conquer and dominate virtually one-half of the world with one-half of its population, while Hitler's purpose is, first to conquer continental Europe, and then to seize the British Isles, and through control of the British fleet to dominate the seven seas.

Events have demonstrated beyond question that each of the Axis powers was bent on unlimited conquest. As time went on it became manifest that the United States and the whole Western Hemisphere were ultimate targets. Conclusive proof was given by the international desperadoes themselves through the publication on September 27, 1940 of the Tripartite Pact. By that treaty of alliance Germany, Japan and Italy in effect agreed that, if any country not then at war with one of them placed obstacles in the way of the program of conquest of any of them, the three would unite in political, military, and economic action against that country. This provision was aimed directly at the United States. One of the highest official spokesmen of the Axis powers openly proclaimed that the objective of the three partners was a new world order to be achieved by force.

Finally a realization that these plans and purposes created a state of imminent and acute danger to all remaining peaceful countries, especially to those of the Western Hemisphere, forced us to face the all-important question as to when and where the peaceful nations, including ours, should begin to resist the movements of military aggression in order to make such resistance most effective.

It was in these circumstances that our Government felt the compelling importance of adopting the policy of aid to Great Britain and to other nations which resisted aggression, as set forth in the Lease-Lend Act, submitted to Congress in January 1941. It is scarcely necessary to say that all subsequent utterances and acts of the leaders of Germany, Japan, and Italy have fully confirmed the wisdom and timeliness of the policy of this Government in thus proceeding to defend the country before it should be too late.

In December 1941, acting in concert, moving in harmony with their world-wide objective, all three launched their assault against us, the spearhead of which was at Pearl Harbor, reasoning that to achieve victory they must conquer us, and to conquer us they must strike before we were prepared to resist successfully.

When they made this concerted attack against us, the war lords of Japan and Germany must have believed that at the root of our sincere and strong desire for peace lay a lack of will and of capacity to rise in unity of purpose and to pour all our strength and energy into the battle. They have since begun to learn better at Wake and at Midway; at Bataan and at Corregidor; in the Straits of Macassar and in the Coral Sea; from the sky over Tokyo itself; again at Midway; on and over every ocean of the world traversed by our air fleets and our naval and merchant vessels; on every battlefield of the world increasingly supplied with our war materials. They will have final and conclusive answer from our expanding armies, navies, and air forces, operating side by side with our valiant allies and backed by our nation-wide industrial power and the courage, the determination, and the ingenuity of our people. That answer is being forged in the fighting spirit which now pervades the people of this country, in the will to victory of all the United Nations.

In this vast struggle, we, Americans, stand united with those who, like ourselves, are fighting for the preservation of their freedom; with those who are fighting to regain the freedom of which they have been brutally deprived; with those who are fighting for the opportunity to achieve freedom.

We have always believed-and we believe today-that all peoples, without distinction of race, color, or religion, who are prepared and willing to accept the responsibilities of liberty, are entitled to its enjoyment. We have always sought-and we seek today-to encourage and aid all who aspire to freedom to establish their right to it by preparing themselves to assume its obligations. We have striven to meet squarely our own responsibility in this respect-in Cuba, in the Philippines, and wherever else it has devolved upon us. It has been our purpose in the past-and will remain our purpose in the future-to use the full measure of our influence to support attainment of freedom by all peoples who, by their acts, show themselves worthy of it and ready for it.

We, who have received from the preceding generations the priceless fruits of the centuries-old struggle for liberty, freely accept today the sacrifices which may be needed to pass on to our children an even greater heritage.

Our enemies confront us with armed might in every part of the globe. We cannot win this war by standing at our borders and limiting ourselves to beating off attacks. Air, submarine, and other forms of assault can be effectively defeated only if those attacked seek out and destroy the sources of attack. We shall send all the aid that we can to our gallant allies. And we shall seek out our enemies and attack them at any and every point of the globe at which the destruction of the Axis forces can be accomplished most effectively, most speedily, and most certainly.

We know the magnitude of the task before us. We know that its accomplishment will exact unlimited effort and unfaltering courage. However long the road we shall press on to the final victory.

Temporary reverses must not and will not be the occasion for weakness and discouragement. On the contrary, they are the signal for all true soldiers and patriots to strike back all the harder, with that superb resolution which never yields to force or threat of force.

Fighting as we are in self-defense, in self-preservation, we must make certain the defeat and destruction of the world-invading forces of Hitler and the Japanese war lords. To do this our people and the peoples of every one of the twenty-eight United Nations must make up their minds to sacrifice time and substance and life itself to an extent unprecedented in past history.

International desperadoes like individual bandits will not abandon outlawry voluntarily. They will only be stopped by force.

III

With victory achieved our first concern must be for those whose sufferings have been almost beyond human endurance. When the armies of our enemies are beaten, the people of many countries will be starving and without means of producing food; homeless and without means of building shelter; their fields scorched; their cattle slaughtered; their tools gone; their factories and mines destroyed; their roads and transport wrecked. Unknown millions will be far from their homes-prisoners of war, inmates of concentration camps, forced laborers in alien lands, refugees from battle, from cruelty, from starvation. Disease and danger of disease will lurk everywhere. In some countries confusion and chaos will follow the cessation of hostilities. Victory must be followed by swift and effective action to meet these pressing human needs.

At the same time all countries-those which will need relief and those more fortunate-will be faced with the immediate problems of transition from war to peace. War production must be transformed into production for the peacetime needs of man-kind. In some countries the physical ravages of war must be repaired. In others, agriculture must be re-established. In all countries returning soldiers must find places in the work of peace. There will be enormous deficiencies of many kinds of goods. All countries, including ours, will need an immense volume of production. There will, therefore, exist vast opportunities for useful employment. The termination of the war effort will release, for use in peaceful pursuits, stirring enthusiasms, the aspirations and energies of youth, technical experience, and-in many industries-ample plants and abundance of tools. The compelling demands of war are revealing how great a supply of goods can be produced for national defense. The needs of peace should be no less compelling, though some of the means of meeting them must be different. Toward meeting these needs each and every nation should intensively direct its efforts to the creation of an abundance for peacetime life. This can only be achieved by a combination of the efforts of individuals, the efforts of groups, and the efforts of nations. Governments can and must help to focus the energies by encouraging, coordinating, and aiding the efforts of individuals and groups.

During this period of transition the United Nations must continue to act in the spirit of cooperation which now underlies their war effort-to supplement and make more effective the action of countries individually in re-establishing public order, in providing swift relief, in meeting the manifold problems of readjustment.

Beyond these there will lie before all countries the great constructive task of building human freedom and Christian morality on firmer and broader foundations than ever before. This task, too, will of necessity call for both national and international action.

Within each nation liberty under law is an essential requirement of progress. The spirit of liberty, when deeply imbedded in the minds and hearts of the people, is the most powerful remedy for racial animosities, religious intolerance, ignorance, and all the other evils which prevent men from uniting in a brotherhood of truly civilized existence. It inspires men to acquisition of knowledge and understanding. It is the only real foundation of political and social stability.

Liberty is more than a matter of political rights, indispensable as those rights are. In our own country we have learned from bitter experience that to be truly free, men must have, as well, economic freedom and economic security-the assurance for all alike of an opportunity to work as free men in the company of free men; to obtain through work the material and spiritual means of life; to advance through the exercise of ability, initiative, and enterprise; to make provision against the hazards of human existence. We know that this is true of mankind everywhere. We know that in all countries there has been-and there will be increasingly in the future-demand for a forward movement of social justice. Each of us must be resolved that, once the war is won, this demand shall be met as speedily and as fully as possible.

All these advances-in political freedom, in economic betterment, in social justice, in spiritual values-can be achieved by each nation primarily through its own work and effort, mainly through its own wise policies and actions. They can be made only where there is acceptance and cultivation of the concepts and the spirit of human rights and human freedom. It is impossible for any nation or group of nations to prescribe the methods or provide the means by which any other nation can accomplish or maintain its own political and economic independence, be strong, prosper, and attain high spiritual goals. It is possible, however, for all nations to give and to receive help.

That which nations can and must do toward helping one another is to take, by cooperative action, steps for the elimination of impediments and obstructions which prevent the full use by each-for the welfare of its people-of the energy and resources which are at its command. And the nations can and must, again by cooperative action under common agreement, create such facilities as will enable each to increase the effectiveness of its own national efforts.

Such cooperative action is already under way. Twenty-eight United Nations have proclaimed their adherence to a program of principles and purposes by which mankind may advance toward higher standards of national and international conduct. That program is embodied in the Declaration made on August 14, 1941, by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill, now known as the Atlantic Charter.

The pledge of the Atlantic Charter is of a system which will give every nation, large or small, a greater assurance of stable peace, greater opportunity for the realization of its aspirations to freedom, and greater facilities for material advancement. But that pledge implies an obligation for each nation to demonstrate its capacity for stable and progressive government, to fulfill scrupulously its established duties to other nations, to settle its international differences and disputes by none but peaceful methods, and to make its full contribution to the maintenance of enduring peace.

IV

For decades all nations have lived in the shadow of threatened coercion or war. This has imposed heavy burdens of armament, which in the cases of many nations has absorbed so large a part of their production effort as to leave the remainder of their resources inadequate for maintaining, let alone improving, the economic, social, and cultural standards of their people. Closely related to this has been a burden less obvious but of immense weight-the inevitable limitation that fear of war imposes on productive activity. Many men, groups of men, and even nations have dared not plan, create, or increase the means of production, fearing lest war come and their efforts thus be rendered in vain.

No nation can make satisfactory progress while its citizens are in the grip of constant fear of external attack or interference. It is plain that some international agency must be created which can-by force, if necessary-keep the peace among nations in the future. There must be international cooperative action to set up the mechanisms which can thus insure peace. This must include eventual adjustment of national armaments in such a manner that the rule of law cannot be successfully challenged and that the burden of armaments may be reduced to a minimum.

In the creation of such mechanisms there would be a practical and purposeful application of sovereign powers through measures of international cooperation for purposes of safeguarding the peace. Participation by all nations in such measures would be for each its contribution toward its own future security and safety from outside attack.

Settlement of disputes by peaceful means, and indeed all processes of international cooperation, presuppose respect for law and obligations. It is plain that one of the institutions which must be established and be given vitality is an international court of justice. It is equally clear that, in the process of re-establishing international order, the United Nations must exercise surveillance over aggressor nations until such time as the latter demonstrate their willingness and ability to live at peace with other nations. How long such surveillance will need to continue must depend upon the rapidity with which the peoples of Germany, Japan, Italy, and their satellites give convincing proof that they have repudiated and abandoned the monstrous philosophy of superior race and conquest by force and have embraced loyally the basic principles of peaceful processes. During the formative period of the world organization, interruption by these aggressors must be rendered impossible.

One of the greatest of all obstacles which in the past have impeded human progress and afforded breeding grounds for dictators has been extreme nationalism. All will agree that nationalism and its spirit are essential to the healthy and normal political and economic life of a people, but when policies of nationalism-political, economic, social, and moral-are carried to such extremes as to exclude and prevent necessary policies of international cooperation, they become dangerous and deadly. Nationalism, run riot between the last war and this war, defeated all attempts to carry out indispensable measures of international economic and political action, encouraged and facilitated the rise of dictators, and drove the world straight toward the present war.

During this period narrow and short-sighted nationalism found its most virulent expression in the economic field. It prevented goods and services from flowing in volume at all adequate from nation to nation and thus severely hampered the work of production, distribution and consumption, and greatly retarded efforts for social betterment.

No nation can make satisfactory progress when it is deprived, by its own action or by the action of others, of the immeasurable benefits of international exchange of goods and services. The Atlantic Charter declares the right of all nations to "access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity." This is essential if the legitimate and growing demand for the greatest practicable measure of stable employment is to be met, accompanied by rising standards of living. If the actual and potential losses resulting from limitations on economic activity are to be eliminated, a system must be provided by which this can be assured.

In order to accomplish this, and to establish among the nations a circle of mutual benefit, excessive trade barriers of the many different kinds must be reduced, and practices which impose injuries on others and divert trade from its natural economic course must be avoided. Equally plain is the need for making national currencies once more freely exchangeable for each other at stable rates of exchange; for a system of financial relations so devised that materials can be produced and ways may be found of moving them where there are markets created by human need; for machinery through which capital may-for the development of the world's resources and for the stabilization of economic activity-move on equitable terms from financially stronger to financially weaker countries. There may be need for some special trade arrangement and for international agreements to handle difficult surplus problems and to meet situations in special areas.

These are only some of the things that nations can attempt to do as continuous discussion and experience instruct the judgment. There are bound to be many others. But the new policies should always be guided by cautious and sound judgment lest we make new mistakes in place of old ones and create new conflicts.

Building for the future in the economic sphere thus means that each nation must give substance and reality to programs of social and economic progress by augmenting production and using the greater output for the increase of general welfare; but not permitting it to be diverted or checked by special interests, private or public. It also means that each nation must play its full part in a system of world relations designed to facilitate the production and movement of goods in response to human needs.

With peace among nations reasonably assured, with political stability established, with economic shackles removed, a vast fund of resources will be released in each nation to meet the needs of progress, to make possible for all of its citizens an advancement toward higher living standards, to invigorate the constructive forces of initiative and enterprise. The nations of the world will then be able to go forward in the manner of their own choosing in all avenues of human betterment more completely than they ever have been able to do in the past. They will do so through their own efforts and with complete self-respect. Continuous self-development of nations and individuals in a framework of effective cooperation with others is the sound and logical road to the higher standards of life which we all crave and seek.

No nation will find this easy. Neither victory nor any form of post-war settlement will of itself create a millennium. Rather we shall be offered an opportunity to eliminate vast obstacles and wastes, to make available additional means of advancing national and international standards, to create new facilities whereby the natural resources of the earth and the products of human hands and brains can be more effectively utilized for the promotion of human welfare.

To make full use of this opportunity, we must be resolved not alone to proclaim the blessings and benefits which we all alike desire for humanity but to find the mechanisms by which they may be most fully and most speedily attained and be most effectively safeguarded.

The manifold tasks that lie ahead will not be accomplished overnight. There will be need for plans, developed with careful consideration and carried forward boldly and vigorously. The vision, the resolution, and the skill with which the conditions of peace will be established and developed after the war will be as much a measure of man's capacity for freedom and progress as the fervor and determination which men show in winning the victory.

Without impediment to the fullest prosecution of the war-indeed for its most effective prosecution-the United Nations should from time to time, as they did in adopting the Atlantic Charter, formulate and proclaim their common views regarding fundamental policies which will chart for mankind a wise course based on enduring spiritual values. In support of such policies an informed public opinion must be developed. This is a task of intensive study, hard thinking, broad vision, and leadership-not for governments alone, but for parents, and teachers, and clergymen, and all those, within each nation, who provide spiritual, moral, and intellectual guidance. Never did so great and so compelling a duty in this respect devolve upon those who are in positions of responsibility, public and private.

V

For the immediate present the all-important issue is that of winning the war-winning it as soon as possible and winning it decisively. Into that we must put our utmost effort-now and every day until victory is won.

A bitter armed attack on human freedom has aroused mankind to new heights of courage, determination, and moral strength. It has evoked a spirit of work, sacrifice, and cooperative effort. With that strength and with that spirit we shall win.

Saturday, October 30, 2021

Sunday October 30, 1921. Failed union.

Evelyn Nesbit standing beside two women in her tearoom, New York City.  This photo was likely published on this day, rather than taken on this day. Nesbit had been a famous actress and model who had been associated with sensational news.  At this point, she was temporarily outside of the entertainment industry.

On this day in 1921, voting took place in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, to elect a congress for the newly created, but not yet functioning, and in fact never to function, Federation of Central America. The Congress was to take office on January 15, 2022.

It nearly goes without saying that if this union of Central American states had succeeded, the region would be much better off today.

Saturday, December 1, 2018

The Central American Mess and Citations to the Statue of Liberty. Nobody is going to do anything, probably.

The Statue of Liberty from a distance view, the way its likely often seen by people who live in the neighborhood.

Somewhere on this blog I have some posts about arguments you shouldn't make. That is, things that when you hear them, you ought to just quit listening as the argument has become a cliche of a cliche ("think of the children" is one such example, although I still haven't posted that example, which remains in draft).

One of the things I should include in that list would be citations to the poem The New Colossus and references to the Statue of Liberty in general.  Indeed, I've made that argument here before.  But sure enough, any time a debate on immigration comes up, somebody will drag out The New Colossus as if its a foundational document for the country.  It isn't.  It's just bad poetry.

Frankly, I'm not all that super wild about the Statue of Liberty either, although I will credit it a great deal more.  Our copy of the statue is version 2.0, a prior smaller one having existed in France, where its designers lived.  It's a fairly typical French statue of the period, which tended to feature women with very muscular features (as in the French Railway Workers Memorial post the other day).  I'm not exactly sure what was up with that, but it was quite common at the time.  The Statue of Liberty is actually one of the better examples of such statues and it is attractive, which doesn't make it over all absolutely great art, save for its gigantic size.


Anyhow, any time the question of immigration comes up, if the suggestion is anything other than just open the borders up in a country that has the most open borders on the planet, somebody will drag out the Statue of Liberty and the poem and post it as an argument.  I just saw the first one regarding the refugees from Central America in the paper this morning in the form, predictably, of a political cartoon in which the statue wonders if she should go back to France (which is a totally absurd argument given that the annual immigration rate into Europe is minuscule as a rule compared to the United States.)

This symbolizes a lot of the American problem with fixing immigration in the country, and it desperately needs to be fixed.  The current system, a byproduct of the mushy thinking of Senator Edward Kennedy, amplified by the destruction of internal immigration law enforcement in the 1970s, assumes that the United States is physically growing like a cancer cell and that its impossible to reach the point where the population of the country, mostly growing due to immigration, is harming the country as a whole both economically and environmentally  It's likely that we achieved that point quite some time ago, perhaps in the 1970s itself.

Which makes most of the arguments about immigration complete and unadulterated baloney.  Large immigration rates like we have are not necessary to sustain the economy in any fashion whatsoever, which is the the prime intellectual argument on their behalf.  It only serves to depress wages in a country in which the lower middle class is already having a very hard time.  In an era in which computerization is wiping out jobs, and in which General Motors just announced its taking out 14,000 jobs in manufacturing, importing no skilled labor is really detrimental to the lower middle class laboring demographic, let alone American born urban minorities, whom it directly impacts.  Indeed, ironically, at one time the leadership of the largely Hispanic United Farm Workers was actually violently opposed to illegal immigration for that very reason, and it could hardly have been regarded as a right wing organization.

What importing no skill labor does do is to create a pool of very low wage labor at the bottom end which is great for the upper middle class and the wealthy and it makes for low class domestic servant labor.

It's also okay, but not really great, for the immigrants who come in, in that class, which is why their plight can't be ignored and they can't be disregarded.  But simply citing a poem as policy is, frankly, stupid.

Immigration at the current rate, we should note, is also fueling, although only in part, the ongoing mass urbanization that chews up American rural areas daily, which is arguably an environmental disaster (again, that's only part of the explanation and in fact probably not the primary one. . . most immigrants don't live in those places and could hardly ever afford to).  And then there's the argument that "we're a nation of immigrants", which is a sort of race based argument taking the position, more or less, that the original native population doesn't really county (they were here, they weren't immigrants) and which isn't an argument anyhow rather than a statement.  A better argument related to that is that our diversity gives us strength, which likely is true, up to a point, but which doesn't actually counter the problems which immigration at our current levels create.

Which takes us to the current flood of Central American refugees trying to get into the United States, the members of the recent caravan being only part of a movement that commenced some time last year.

Refugees are a different deal entirely, and perhaps citation to the "Give me your tired" and all makes sense there.  I've posted along those lines here as well.  All peoples and nations have a duty to refugees no matter where they are from.

But what if you can solve the root problem causing the refugee crisis?

I.e., what if the United States, or a combination of nations including the United States, can solve the problem?

Something is clearly going on in Central America causing people to flee there, but what?  What's motivating this?

What's going on in Central America is what is always going on in Central America, but at epic levels.  

Anarchy is going on in Central America. . . or at least a lot of it.

Occasionally Naive Reddit Rubes will wax philosophic on Reddit's various economic forums about how anarchy would be nifty.  If you think so, just move to Honduras.  They have it.

Flag of the Federated Republic of Central America.  A Central American republic that existed in 1821, and then again from 1823 to 1840. There's been efforts to put it back together ever since.  From Wikipedia Commons, by grant of Huhsunqu.

To some degree, they always have, and all the things that flow from anarchy, including massive corruption, crime and violence.

The flag of Honduras.  Honduras became independent, in a sense, in 1821 when it became independent from Spain as part of the first federated Central American state.  Almost immediately after that, however, it became First Mexican Empire.  In 1823 it became independent of Mexico and part of the new United Provinces of Central America, a democratic federated Central American state.  That state repeatedly failed and Honduras carried on as an independent nation, but sadly it was one of the Central American countries that was most in favor of a single Central American nation, something that would have gone a long ways toward preventing the current crisis and much of the regions tragic history from occurring.  The United States intervened in Honduras militarily in 1903, 1907, 1911, 1912, 1919, 1924 and 1925.

Things are so bad in Honduras, which underwent a coup in 2009 and then reemerged as a democracy about a year later, that even Dunkin' Donuts have armed security guards.  The majority of the current emigrants are from Honduras, and have traveled through helpless Guatemala and into Mexico (which resisted it at its southern border, something that's been largely missed in the news).  Things are otherwise not perfect in the neighborhood either.  El Salvador has become enormously lawless.  Nicaragua has gone form being a major tourist destination from being in crisis in just a year, following the removal of economic supports from Venezuela, which is also a mess.  Honduras, Guatemala (which is doing much better) and Nicaragua together are in a titanic economic and social mess or have the potential to be.  Only Costa Rica and Belize seem to be doing well.

Guatemala's flag, noting its 1821 independence date from Spain.  Guatemala's Independence came within the United Provinces of Central America, not as an independent nation.  The United States overthrew a left leaning democratic governing in the late 1950s (an earlier plan to do that in the early 50s was aborted when details started to leak) and the country fought a bitter civil war that came to an end in 1996.  Since then the Catholic Church provided enormous assistance in providing a means by which the country could overcome its violent past, something that's generally not appreciated by Protestant missionary groups that oddly regard the region as missionary territory.  The country has been doing well and recovering overall but at the current time it cannot help but be stressed by the massive human influx from Honduras.

They do have governments, to be sure, but those governments are not wholly admirable and the entire region has become embroiled in what is essentially a series of gang wars as the economy collapses. That's why people are leaving.  Entire regions are now controlled by criminal gangs and the governments, which in many instances in the past have been pretty criminal in and of themselves (I'm not familiar with any of the current governments).

The blue and white flag of El Salvador. . .notice the theme here?  Like Mexico, El Salvador went into rebellion when a Catholic Priest made a cry for justice and the same, in its case in 1811.  A revolution ensued.  It too was a province of the original Central American state which could not stay together.  Very densely populated, the country fought a war with its former co-province Honduras in 1969.  The country itself went into a civil war in 1979 that lasted until 1992, with the United States backing the right wing side and the left wing forces, including the Soviet Union and Cuba, backing the left wing side in one of the Cold War's proxy wars.

And that makes their plight genuine.

Nicaragua's flag, which is nearly indistinguishable from El Salvador's.

But nobody seems to be taking the root problem into account.

Unless the United States and Mexico are willing to absorb the entire population of Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and El Salvador, a solution needs to be found what is going on.  And the agonizing truth of the matter is that the solution isn't going to come from inside any of those countries, or at least it appears unlikely that it will.  It's going to have to be imposed on them, or at least that can be argued for Honduras.  And they'll resist it, most likely.  And not without justification.

Indeed, we've had similar examples from Africa in the past couple of decades, and there have been local solutions that have worked.  They all principally involved an armed invasion by an upset neighbor.

And there you have it. The problem, the solution, and whether the solution is a problem itself.

At one time, what is going on inside of these countries, would have been solved by now.   Theodore Roosevelt would have solved it.  William Howard Taft would have solved it. Woodrow Wilson would have solved it.  Do we dare solve it in that fashion, and should we?  Would it be moral to?



Indeed, we're getting an ironic lesson, for which we do not appreciate the irony, and for which we aren't paying much attention, on why an entire series of Presidents didn't think twice about interfering in the affairs of Central American states and toppling their government.

Which may be both a theoretical solution today, as much as we hate to admit it, but which is also part of the root of the problem on what's going on today.

Today's crisis is partially a byproduct of our own actions, dating back to the 1950s, when we started heavily interfering in these nations in a Cold War context.  No, that's only partially true. . .their governments at the time and the forces inside those countries also reflected reaction and counteraction to actions we'd taken dating back to about 1900 or so. Well even that isn't right, as the entire region had an odd and chaotic 19th Century history.  But the Cold War interference was major and has cast a very long shadow.  We propped up a military government in El Salvador that prompted a left wing insurrection.  We did the same in Nicaragua with worse results which resulted in that country falling to a left wing government which turned out to be less left wing than we supposed but which is still in power and not completely democratic. That conflict helped spread another one into southern Mexico.  We overthrew the government of Guatemala. Our gunboat diplomacy evolved into CIA diplomacy, and now neglect is letting the boils that developed at that time really fester.  The whole region, save for Costa Rica, Belize and Panama, is a mess.

And its a mess that those countries probably can't fix themselves.

Of course, not only can they not fix them, those countries really shouldn't exist.  Frankly, they're too plagued with internal problems and too small to be able to address them. A federated state comprised of all of them, and probably Panama, would make more sense and be more stable but that's not going to happen.  Indeed, in a different context, it would have been easy to imagine the enter Central American region outside of Panama (which the U.S. created by backing a regional uprising against Columbia) being part of Mexico, given that it differs little culturally from southern Mexico.  Mexico, no doubt, is highly relieved that this never came about, but it shows the degree to which Mexico lacked territorial ambition as the United States, had it been in Mexico's geographic position, would undoubtedly have adsorbed the entire region.

But all of that could have occurred, and indeed darned near did.  In fact, it briefly did. . . more than once.

Emperer Augustin I, formerly Gen. Augustin Itubide, the first Emperor of Mexico.  When Mexico became an independent state those who brought that about weren't necessarily looking for a liberal democracy by any means.  In fact, while the revolution was initiated by a liberal Catholic Priest, it was taken up by Mexican Spanish aristocracy who didn't have a problem with aristocracy. . . just aristocracy in Spain.  Iturbe was from a Basque aristocratic family and have lived an aristocratic life.  He initially fought for the crown and against the Mexican rebels until switching sides.  He was actually a fairly popular emperor but the country was divided from the start and he served only briefly before going into exile, first in Italy and then in England.  He'd return later to Mexico where he was executed under dubious circumstances.  His last words were "Mexicans! In the very act of my death, I recommend to you the love to the fatherland, and the observance to our religion, for it shall lead you to glory. I die having come here to help you, and I die merrily, for I die amongst you. I die with honor, not as a traitor; I do not leave this stain on my children and my legacy. I am not a traitor, no."  He's interned in a cathedral in Mexico City.

Most of Central America became independent of Spain in 1821.  Interestingly, most of it became independent by default when Mexico obtained its independence.  With the exception of El Salvador, Central American countries did not rise up against the Spanish Empire. El Salvador did in 1811, however, the year after Mexico did, and by way of the same initiating source, the cry to rebellion by a Catholic Priest. The rest of the region found itself independent, however, in 1821 when Mexico was released by Spain.

The flat of the Mexican Empire, the nation that obtained independence from Spain, and which collapsed in 1823.

When that occurred, interestingly enough, two of the forces noted above in fact occurred.  There was a movement to form an independent confederation, but at first the region became a province of the Mexican Empire. The Mexican Empire, however, was itself short lived and collapsed under widespread opposition in 1823, at which time the Central American provinces formed their own country, the Federal Republic of Central America.  The country even expanded up into what today is the Mexican state of Chiapas.  Only Panama, which was part of Columbia, was not part of it.

Had the Central American Republic persisted, much would be different about the region today.  It only held together, however, until 1840 when it fell apart in civil war. All of the modern nations of Central America that were in it use a flag that's based on the one the Central American Republic had, and some of them use a national crest that's based upon it.  Even though the state fell apart, in some ways it was never forgotten and there were real efforts to recreate it, sometimes by force.  In 1907 all of its former regions, except for Belize, joined together in a political agreement to integrate their economies in a manner that all but contemplated future union. The agreement remains in force, but union has not been achieved.  In 1921 all of the old participants except for Nicaragua and Belize signed a treaty of union but did not follow up on it, making the 1921 agreement moribund.

All of which shows that what I've noted here is not simply wild speculation.  The region was united as a province by Colonial Spain, achieved independence as a nation briefly, was absorbed by Mexico as a province, and then achieved statehood again before division drove the nations apart. Ever since then there's been efforts on their part to reunite, but they have not succeeded.

 The flag of Belize, a self governing English possession.  Belize was, early on, part of the Central American Republic but it quickly became a British possession in the wake of the republic's collapse.  The English have made efforts to make it an independent country but its' resisted.  Like much of Central America, Belize's economy has been dominated by foreign interests in its agriculture sector, in this case oddly enough in moder times by Coca Cola, but its developed a successful tourists sector and British political influence has lead to a stable political culture.

Had the Central American republic been able to hold together, it would still be a small nation, but it would be a bi-coastal nation with a somewhat diverse modern economy.  Indeed, if we somewhat assume that the rest of history played out as it did (not a safe assumption at all), it would be a nation today that would be surprisingly diverse in some ways.  Belize, which was part of it, fell into British rule almost as soon as the republic fell apart but today, in spite of having an economic monoculture like much of the various Central American states, has a stable economy and and a booming tourist trade, is surprisingly multicultural even including an Amish farming population.  Costa Rica is likewise booming due to the tourist trade and, for good or ill, has an increasingly large American ex-patriot population as well as a surprising number of citizens who immigrated from South America and Europe.

Costa Rica's flag.  Costa Rica's history in Central America has become unique as during the 20th Century, following upon the fall of a military dictatorship, it abolished its standing army. Thsi made the democratic regime highly stable and seemingly immune from American intervention in spite of its early democratic government being very left leaning.  Costa Rica's modern economy is dominated by the tourist industry.

Additionally, if the Central American Republic had managed to hold things together, it would have helped prevent the region from being sort of the "anti United States" in the Star Trek bizarro world way.  That is, almost everything that seemingly happened to make the US successful didn't happen in Central America.

 U.S. Marines in Nicaragua in 1926, displaying a captured Sandinista flag.  Nicaragua was occupied by the United States from 1913 to 1933.

Indeed, right from the outset, while the advantages  of union were obvious, as the region had been granted Independence due to the Mexican rebellion, rather than its own, there was no real unity in political views.  Now, that's the case with the early U.S. to a degree as well, but this was very much so for the small political class in Central America. As with Mexico, some of this class remained monarchist in view and had no real problem with their former Spanish rulers.  Others were radically republican in an era in which radical republicanism was spreading in Europe. . . after all, this was the era of Napoleon Bonaparte.  That basically doomed the republic and it frankly also made a mess of early Mexican history.  Liberals couldn't bet along with monarchists on anything, and the country simply fell apart. 

That early history carried on for decades and made political cohesion difficult in any of the individual states.  Moreover, it mean that the small states were always economically weak due to their economic monocultures and they were constant prey to foreign, i.e., European and American, economic and military intervention, the only often following the other.  That fact in turn further weakened them, and that all carried through well into the 20th Century.

All of which takes us back to the problem.  A person could argue that a regional or perhaps international mandate should be issued requiring states that aren't flying apart in the region to intervene and impose order.  That would amount to a type of invasion.  The type of invasion that the OAS has occasionally sanctioned in the past, and to which everyone has turned a blind eye, but nobody in the world would turn a blind eye to this.

 Panama's flat.  Panama was never part of the Central American Republic, it was part of Columbia until a U.S. sponsored rebellion separated it in 1903, although in fairness a long running war of rebellion had been trying to do the same for quite some time, and there had been prior efforts to do that as well.  While it doesn't share the history of the other Central American nations in once having been part of a unified nation, it would make sense that it would be, if one ever came together.

Nor perhaps should they.  These are all sovereign nations and while things seem to be flying apart now, they all made huge strides towards functioning democracy after the 1960s.  Even El Salvador, which fell in revolution to a government we thought was going to be a Communist one, didn't really take that turn and the Communists turned into liberal democrats, for the most part.

And would that type of intervention be even moral?  It's very doubtful.  Can in an international body suspend sovereignty in that fashion?  It could declare that it could, but that's problematic.  Of course, at some point governments can descend into such anarchy that they don't exist at all for a country in question, such as in the example of pre 9/11 Afghanistan.

Well, it's all academic. Nobody is going to do anything.  Instead we'll get trite arguments about the Statute of Liberty.